The Beta-hCG+Erythropoietin in Acute Stroke (BETAS) Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Animal data suggest the use of beta-human chorionic gonadotropin followed by erythropoietin to promote brain repair after stroke. The current study directly translated these results by evaluating safety of this sequential growth factor therapy through a 3-center, single-dose, open-label, noncontrolled, Phase IIa trial. METHODS: Patients with ischemic stroke 24 to 48 hours old and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of 6 to 24 started a 9-day course of beta-human chorionic gonadotropin (once daily on Days 1, 3, and 5 of study participation) followed by erythropoietin (once daily on Days 7, 8, and 9 of study participation). This study also evaluated performance of serially measured domain-specific end points. RESULTS: A total of 15 patients were enrolled. Two deaths occurred, neither related to study medications. No safety concerns were noted among clinical or laboratory measures, including screening for deep vein thrombosis and serial measures of serum hemoglobin. In several instances, domain-specific end points provided greater insight into impairments as compared with global outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: Results support the safety of this sequential, 2-growth factor therapy initiated 24 to 48 hours after stroke onset.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".