MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019386223 · doi:10.1111/ijs.12304

Acute Imaging Does Not Improve ASTRAL Score's Accuracy despite Having a Prognostic Value

2014· article· en· W2019386223 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
George Ntaios, Vasileios Papavasileiou, Mohamed Faouzi, Peter Vanacker, Max Wintermark, Patrik Michel

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Stroke · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSchweizerische HerzstiftungCentre Hospitalier Universitaire VaudoisSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMedicineMagnetic resonance imagingComputed tomography angiographyRadiologyLogistic regressionMagnetic resonance angiographyOdds ratioStroke (engine)AngiographyModified Rankin ScaleInternal medicineIschemic strokeIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The ASTRAL score was recently shown to reliably predict three-month functional outcome in patients with acute ischemic stroke. AIM: The study aims to investigate whether information from multimodal imaging increases ASTRAL score's accuracy. METHODS: All patients registered in the ASTRAL registry until March 2011 were included. In multivariate logistic-regression analyses, we added covariates derived from parenchymal, vascular, and perfusion imaging to the 6-parameter model of the ASTRAL score. If a specific imaging covariate remained an independent predictor of three-month modified Rankin score>2, the area-under-the-curve (AUC) of this new model was calculated and compared with ASTRAL score's AUC. We also performed similar logistic regression analyses in arbitrarily chosen patient subgroups. RESULTS: When added to the ASTRAL score, the following covariates on admission computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging-based multimodal imaging were not significant predictors of outcome: any stroke-related acute lesion, any nonstroke-related lesions, chronic/subacute stroke, leukoaraiosis, significant arterial pathology in ischemic territory on computed tomography angiography/magnetic resonance angiography/Doppler, significant intracranial arterial pathology in ischemic territory, and focal hypoperfusion on perfusion-computed tomography. The Alberta Stroke Program Early CT score on plain imaging and any significant extracranial arterial pathology on computed tomography angiography/magnetic resonance angiography/Doppler were independent predictors of outcome (odds ratio: 0·93, 95% CI: 0·87-0·99 and odds ratio: 1·49, 95% CI: 1·08-2·05, respectively) but did not increase ASTRAL score's AUC (0·849 vs. 0·850, and 0·8563 vs. 0·8564, respectively). In exploratory analyses in subgroups of different prognosis, age or stroke severity, no covariate was found to increase ASTRAL score's AUC, either. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of information derived from multimodal imaging does not increase ASTRAL score's accuracy to predict functional outcome despite having an independent prognostic value. More selected radiological parameters applied in specific subgroups of stroke patients may add prognostic value of multimodal imaging.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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)0.0020.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations15
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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