MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409112647 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2025.60

Current trends in the surgical management of spontaneous lobar intracerebral hemorrhage in Canada: A nationwide survey

2025· article· en· W4409112647 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Catherine Veilleux, Andrew M. Demchuk, Garnette R. Sutherland, Sanju Lama, William K. Diprose, Alexander D. Rebchuk, Matthew E. Eagles, Jenna Smith‐Forrester, Andrew Ajisebutu, Tristan Brunette‐Clément, Anne-Marie Langlois, Braeden D. Newton, Michael D. Hill

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversité de MontréalUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of TorontoDalhousie UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntracerebral hemorrhageSpontaneous intracerebral hemorrhageMedicineSurgerySubarachnoid hemorrhage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background: The Early Minimally Invasive Removal of Intracerebral Hemorrhage (ENRICH) trial demonstrated that minimally invasive surgery to treat spontaneous lobar intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) improved functional outcomes. We aimed to explore current management trends for spontaneous lobar ICH in Canada to assess practice patterns and determine whether further randomized controlled trials are needed to clarify the role of surgical intervention. Methods: Neurologists, neurosurgeons, physiatrists and trainees in these specialties were invited to complete a 16-question survey exploring three areas: (1) current management for spontaneous lobar ICH at their institution, (2) perceived influence of ENRICH on their practice and (3) perceived need for additional clinical trial data. Standard descriptive statistics were used to report categorical variables. The χ 2 test was used to compare responses across specialties and career stages. Results: The survey was sent to 433 physicians, and 101 (23.3%) responded. Sixty-eight percent of participants reported that prior to publication of the ENRICH trial, spontaneous lobar ICH was primarily managed conservatively, with surgery reserved for life-threatening situations. Forty-three percent of participants did not foresee a significant increase in surgical intervention at their institution. Of neurosurgical respondents, 33% remained hesitant to offer surgical intervention beyond lifesaving operations. Only 5% reported routinely using specifically designed technologies to evacuate ICH. Seventy percent reported that another randomized controlled trial comparing nonsurgical to surgical management for spontaneous lobar ICH is needed. Conclusions: There is significant practice variability in the management of spontaneous lobar ICH across Canadian institutions, stressing the need for additional clinical trial data to determine the role of surgical intervention.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage ResearchFrench-language works237,207