MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W62636733 · doi:10.1177/159101991001600211

Subarachnoid Hemorrhage following Posterior Spinal Artery Aneurysm

2010· review· en· W62636733 on OpenAlexaff
Sasikhan Geibprasert, Timo Krings, Jonas Apitzsch, M. H. T. Reinges, Kay Nolte, Franz‐Josef Hans

Bibliographic record

VenueInterventional Neuroradiology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications
Canadian institutionsToronto Western Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSubarachnoid hemorrhageAneurysmAnterior spinal arterySpinal cordRadiologyAngiographySurgeryDissection (medical)Posterior communicating arteryArterial dissection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Isolated posterior spinal artery aneurysms are rare vascular lesions. We describe the case of a 43-year-old man presenting with spinal subarachnoid hemorrhage after a minor trauma who was found to have a dissecting aneurysm of a posterior spinal artery originating from the right T4 level. Endovascular treatment was not contemplated because of the small size of the feeding artery, whereas surgical resection was deemed more appropriate because of the posterolateral perimedullary location that was well appreciated on CT angiography. After surgical resection of the aneurysm the patient had a complete neurological recovery. In comparison to anterior spinal artery aneurysms whose pathogenesis is diverse, posterior spinal aneurysms are most often secondary to a dissection and represent false or spurious aneurysms. Although the definite diagnosis still requires spinal angiography, MRI and CT may better delineate the relationship of the aneurysm to the spinal cord in order to determine the best treatment method. Prompt treatment is recommended as they have high rebleeding and mortality rates.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations49
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInterventional NeuroradiologySame topicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207