MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1583065484 · doi:10.1017/s0317167100008945

Reliability of Point-of-Care Testing of INR in Acute Stroke

2008· article· en· W1583065484 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Theresa Green, Adnan Mansoor, Nancy Newcommon, Caroline J. Stephenson, Eileen Stewart, Michael D. Hill

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsCalgary Laboratory ServicesUniversity of CalgaryFoothills Medical Centre
FundersCalgary Laboratory Services
KeywordsMedicinePoint-of-care testingEmergency departmentConcordancePoint of careIntraclass correlationStroke (engine)Confidence intervalEmergency medicineCoagulation testingAcute strokeProthrombin timeSurgeryInternal medicinePlateletPsychometricsPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In the emergency department, portable point-of-care testing (POCT) coagulation devices may facilitate stroke patient care by providing rapid International Normalized Ratio (INR) measurement. The objective of this study was to evaluate the reliability, validity, and impact on clinical decision-making of a POCT device for INR testing in the setting of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). METHODS: A total of 150 patients (50 healthy volunteers, 51 anticoagulated patients, 49 AIS patients) were assessed in a tertiary care facility. The INR's were measured using the Roche Coaguchek S and the standard laboratory technique. RESULTS: The interclass correlation coefficient and 95% confidence interval between overall POCT device and standard laboratory value INRs was high (0.932 (0.69 - 0.78). In the AIS group alone, the correlation coefficient and 95% CI was also high 0.937 (0.59 - 0.74) and diagnostic accuracy of the POCT device was 94%. CONCLUSIONS: When used by a trained health professional in the emergency department to assess INR in acute ischemic stroke patients, the CoaguChek S is reliable and provides rapid results. However, as concordance with laboratory INR values decreases with higher INR values, it is recommended that with CoaguChek S INRs in the > 1.5 range, a standard laboratory measurement be used to confirm the results.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.064
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.064
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management→French-language works237,207→