MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Selection for Delayed Intravenous Alteplase Treatment Based on a Prognostic Score

2013· article· en· W2003475038 on OpenAlexaff
Rachael L. Fulton, Kennedy R. Lees, Erich Bluhmki, Gabriele Biegert, Gregory W. Albers, Stephen M. Davis, Geoffrey A. Donnan, James C. Grotta, Werner Hacke, Markku Kaste, Rüdiger von Kummer, Ashfaq Shuaib, Danilo Toni

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Stroke · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalRandomized controlled trialModified Rankin ScaleStroke (engine)Odds ratioInternal medicineSample size determinationIschemic strokeStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Approved use of intravenous alteplase for ischemic stroke offers net benefit. Pooled randomized controlled trial analysis suggests additional patients could benefit but others be harmed with treatment initiated beyond 4·5 h after stroke onset. We proposed prognostic scoring methods to identify a strategy for patient selection. METHODS: We selected 500 patients treated by intravenous alteplase and 500 controls from Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive, matching modified Rankin score outcomes to those from pooled randomized controlled trial 4·5-6 h data. We ranked patients by prognostic score. We chose limits to optimize our sample for a net treatment benefit significant at P = 0·01 by Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test and by ordinal regression. For validation, we had these applied to the pooled randomized controlled trial data for 4·5-6 h, testing for net benefit by Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, ordinal regression, and also by dichotomized outcomes: modified Rankin score 0-1, mortality and parenchymal hemorrhage type 2 bleeds. All analyses were adjusted for age and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale. RESULTS: In the training dataset, limits of 56-95 on a prognostic score retained 714 patients in whom there was net benefit significant at P = 0·01. When applied to the 1120 patients in the pooled randomized controlled trial 4·5-6 h dataset, score limits of 56-95 retained 711 patients and gave odds ratio for improved modified Rankin score distribution of 1·13, 95% confidence interval 0·87-1·47, Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel P = 0·89. More patients achieved modified Rankin score 0-1 (odds ratio 1·44, 1·02-2·05, P = 0·04) but mortality and parenchymal hemorrhage type 2 bleeds were increased: odds ratio 1·56, 1·01-2·40, P = 0·04; odds ratio 15·6, 3·7-65·8, P = 0·0002, respectively. CONCLUSION: Selection of patients between 4·5 and 6 h based on simple clinical measures failed to deliver a population in whom the alteplase effect would be safe and effective.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations10
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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