MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117124636 · doi:10.14740/jnr1039

Chronic Subdural Hematoma Presenting as Insidious Onset Unilateral Involuntary Movements

2025· article· en· W7117124636 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michelle Cherian, Ahmed Ba Theeb, M. H. S. Rashid

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurology Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurosurgical Procedures and Complications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChronic subdural hematomaChoreiform movementMagnetic resonance imagingDifferential diagnosisHematomaMovement disordersIncidence (geometry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the average age in Western countries continuing to rise, chronic subdural hematoma (cSDH) has emerged as an increasingly common neurological condition in these countries. The condition is particularly prevalent among the elderly, with a markedly higher incidence in individuals over 65 years of age. We present the case of a 79-year-old female who developed left-sided choreiform movements or hemiballismus several days after a minor fall. Initial imaging revealed no acute findings; however, delayed magnetic resonance imaging revealed a small chronic right-sided subdural collection. Notably, the patient’s symptoms gradually improved over a 6-month period. Overall, this case illustrates that cSDH can present with delayed-onset hyperkinetic movements, likely through biochemical or microvascular effects on cortical function rather than solely mechanical pressure. It underscores the importance of considering cSDH in the differential diagnosis for delayed-onset movement disorders and highlights the value of follow-up imaging and clinical monitoring, even after seemingly minor trauma.

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: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.362 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurology ResearchSame topicNeurosurgical Procedures and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207