MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019984529 · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.113.003047

Can DWI-ASPECTS Substitute for Lesion Volume in Acute Stroke?

2013· article· en· W2019984529 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Constance de Margerie‐Mellon, Guillaume Turc, Marie Tisserand, Olivier Naggara, David Calvet, Laurence Legrand, Jean-François Méder, Jean‐Louis Mas, Jean‐Claude Baron, Catherine Oppenheim

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInterquartile rangeThrombolysisStroke (engine)Diffusion MRILesionRadiologyNuclear medicineAcute strokeEffective diffusion coefficientMagnetic resonance imagingMiddle cerebral arteryNeuroradiologyNeurologySurgeryIschemiaInternal medicineTissue plasminogen activator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The extent of diffusion lesion on pretreatment imaging is a risk factor for poor outcome and hemorrhagic transformation after thrombolysis, and volumes of 70 to 100 mL have been advocated as cut-offs. However, estimating diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) lesion volume (VolDWI) in the acute setting may be cumbersome. We aimed to determine whether the DWI-Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (DWI-ASPECTS) can substitute for VolDWI. METHODS: DWI-ASPECTS and VolDWI were measured retrospectively on pretreatment MRI (median onset-to-MRI delay=122 minutes) in 330 consecutively treated patients with middle cerebral artery stroke. RESULTS: DWI-ASPECTS and VolDWI were strongly correlated (ρ=-0.82), but each DWI-ASPECTS point corresponded to a wide range of VolDWI. All patients with DWI-ASPECTS≥7 (n=207) had VolDWI<70 mL, whereas 32 of the 34 patients with DWI-ASPECTS<4 had VolDWI>100 mL. However, intermediate DWI-ASPECTS (4-6; n=89) corresponded to highly variable VolDWI (median, 66 mL; interquartile range, 40-98). CONCLUSIONS: Although each DWI-ASPECTS point corresponds to a wide range of volumes, DWI-ASPECTS<4 or ≥7 may be used as reliable surrogates of VolDWI>100 or <70 mL, respectively.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.390
Threshold uncertainty score0.937

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations93
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207