Clinical value of computed tomography perfusion source images in acute stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Computed tomography perfusion (CTP) map can sensitively and accurately distinguish between infarct core and ischemic penumbra. However, CTP mapping software might not generate a perfusion map because of head movement; thus, analysing CTP source images (CTP-SI) is necessary in this situation to provide information for stroke diagnosis and therapy. In our work, 'one-stop shop' computed tomography (CT) examination including non-contrast-enhanced CT (NCCT), CTP, CT angiography (CTA) were performed in 24 patients with symptoms of acute stroke less than 9 hours. We divided patients into two groups (with and without delayed perfusion on CTP-SI), and compared the Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) on CTP-SI and CTA-SI with follow-up imaging. Using follow-up imaging ASPECTS as the final infarct size, our results suggests that the ASPECTS of both CTP-SI and CTA-SI effectively predict final infarct core in the group without delayed perfusion, whereas CTP-SI has a potential advantage over CTA-SI in being able to predict final infarct core in the group with delayed perfusion. In conclusion, CTP-SI provides useful complementary information when CTP map software could not generate perfusion maps.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".