MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Stroke Unit Care: Does Ischemic Stroke Subtype Matter?

2011· article· en· W1480879219 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gustavo Saposnik, Daniel Selchen, Jiming Fang, Moira K. Kapral, Eric E. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Stroke · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of TorontoUniversity of CalgarySt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)Lacunar strokeOdds ratioCohortInternal medicineCohort studyPhysical therapyEmergency medicineIschemic strokeCardiologyIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Stroke unit care improves outcomes following ischemic stroke. However, it is not known whether all ischemic stroke subtypes benefit equally from stroke unit admission. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the benefit of stroke unit admission is similar among all ischemic stroke subtypes. Design, setting and patients Prospective cohort study including patients admitted with an acute ischemic stroke between July 2003 and September 2007 to stroke centers participating institutions in the Registry of the Canadian Stroke Network. Ischemic stroke subtype information was determined according to the modified Trial of Org 10 172 in Acute Stroke Treatment criteria and categorized as small vessel disease (lacunar), large artery atherosclerotic disease, cardioembolic, or other (including both other determined and undetermined causes). Main outcome measures The primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality at 30 days after stroke. Secondary outcomes were seven-day mortality and death or institutionalization at discharge. RESULTS: Among 6223 eligible patients with ischemic stroke admitted to regional stroke centers in Ontario, the mean age was 72 years and 52·4% were male. Overall 30-day mortality was 12·2%. The 30-day risk-adjusted mortality was lower for stroke unit care across all stroke subtypes (for lacunar stroke 3·0% vs. 5·3%; for large artery disease 7·5% vs. 14·5%; for cardioembolic 15·3% vs. 23·3%; and for other causes 8·9% vs. 15·9%). In multivariable analysis, after controlling for age, gender, medical comorbidities, and stroke severity, there was a significant reduction in stroke mortality associated with stroke unit admission in all stroke subtypes (odds ratio (95% confidence interval) for lacunar stroke 0·48 (0·27-0·88), for large artery atherosclerotic disease 0·39 (0·27-0·56), for cardioembolic 0·46 (0·36-0·59), and for other causes 0·45 (0·29-0·70)). The results remained similar after a sensitivity analysis excluding patients receiving palliative care, and a secondary analysis including 3215 patients with missing Trial of Org 10 172 in Acute Stroke Treatment classification. CONCLUSION: This study provides 'real-world' evidence that all ischemic stroke subtypes do benefit from a stroke unit admission regardless of the etiology. There is no justification for withholding access to stroke unit care based on stroke subtype.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
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 score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations16
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of StrokeSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207