MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998355731 · doi:10.1159/000356093

Nocturnal Deterioration after Ischemic Stroke and Autonomic Dysfunction: Hypothesis and Implications

2013· review· en· W1998355731 on OpenAlexaff
Iryna Palamarchuk, Kurt Kimpinski, Corbin Lippert, Vladimir Hachinski

Bibliographic record

VenueCerebrovascular Diseases · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)DysautonomiaCardiologyAutonomic nervous systemIschemic strokeNeurologyHemodynamicsAutonomic functionInternal medicineSudden deathBlood pressureAnesthesiaHeart rateHeart rate variabilityIschemiaDiseasePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A significant number of patients admitted to hospital after acute ischemic stroke deteriorate clinically. Deterioration is generally noted within the first 48 h after stroke onset. The mechanisms leading to this deterioration are not fully understood. SUMMARY: One potential cause of this deterioration may be altered or impaired autonomic function. We expect the hemodynamic changes regulated by the autonomic nervous system that are dysregulated after stroke to be exaggerated during sleep, resulting in arrhythmia and blood pressure fluctuations in these patients. Such physiological changes could result in worsening the overall outcome of the ischemic stroke patient or in sudden death. Therefore, it is necessary to summarize yet unrelated observations and hypothesize on their individual effects and interactions as they relate to poststroke deterioration. KEY MESSAGES: If the hypothesis is correct that dysautonomia occurs to the degree that it affects clinical outcomes negatively, this would have important implications for the prevention of neurological deterioration and sudden death after ischemic stroke.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · 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
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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)0.0020.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations22
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCerebrovascular DiseasesSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207