Relationship between sodium intensity and perfusion deficits in acute ischemic stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the relationship between sodium signal intensity changes and oligemia, measured with perfusion-weighted imaging (PWI), in ischemic stroke patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nine ischemic stroke patients (55 ± 13 years), four with follow-up scans, underwent sodium and proton imaging 4-32 hours after symptom onset. Relative sodium intensity was calculated as the ratio of signal intensities in core (identified as hypertintense lesions on diffusion-weighted imaging [DWI]) or putative penumbra (PWI-DWI mismatch) to contralateral homologous regions. RESULTS: Sodium intensity increases in the core were not correlated with the severity of hypoperfusion, measured with either cerebral blood flow (rho = 0.157; P = 0.61) or cerebral blood volume (rho = -0.234; P = 0.44). In contrast, relative sodium intensity was not elevated (4-7 hours 0.96 ± 0.07; 17-32 hours 1.00 ± 0.07) in PWI-DWI mismatch regions. CONCLUSION: Sodium signal intensity cannot be predicted by the degree of hypoperfusion acutely. Sodium intensity also remains unchanged in PWI-DWI mismatch tissue, indicating preservation of ionic homeostasis. Sodium magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), in conjunction with PWI and DWI, may permit identification of patients with viable tissue, despite an unknown symptom onset time.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".