Progressing Stroke: Towards an Internationally Agreed Definition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The study of early neurological deterioration (progression) in acute stroke has been hampered by a lack of standardisation in the terminology or assessment procedures. An international panel was therefore convened, to agree on robust operational definitions for future studies and to validate them in an observational study involving 10 centres from the European Stroke Database Collaboration. METHODS: Standardised neurological assessments were performed daily for the first 3 days on patients with acute stroke, consecutively admitted within 24 h of onset, using the Scandinavian Stroke Scale (SSS) scoring system. An early deterioration episode (EDE) was defined as a >/=2 SSS-point worsening in either conscious level, arm, leg or eye movement scores, and/or a >/=3 SSS-point worsening in speech score, between consecutive neurological assessments. Stroke progression (SP) was defined as a similar neurological worsening comparing the day 3 assessment with the baseline assessment, or death occurring within 72 h of onset. The ability of SP to predict poor outcome (death or a Barthel ADL score <15/20 at 3 months), independently of initial stroke severity or other prognostic factors, was compared with possible alternative definitions, including one based on the Canadian Stroke Scale. RESULTS: The occurrence of EDEs and SP within the first 3 days of admission could be determined in 563 cases. EDEs occurred in 33% and SP in 26% of cases. Both were strong independent predictors of poor outcome. The prognostic efficiency of the European Progressing Stroke Study (EPSS) definition of SP was better than any of the alternatives examined, and clearly better than a definition based on changes in the total SSS score. CONCLUSIONS: The EPSS definitions of EDEs and SP have good construct and prognostic validity. They can be recommended as a standard for future studies on the aetiology and mechanisms of this common and important phenomenon.
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 | 0.107 | 0.082 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".