MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Validation Assessment of Risk Scores to Predict Postthrombolysis Intracerebral Haemorrhage

2010· article· en· W2102620788 on OpenAlexaff
Brett Cucchiara, Scott E. Kasner, David Tanné, Steven R. Levine, Andrew M. Demchuk, Steve R. Messé, Lauren Sansing, Kennedy R. Lees, Patrick D. Lyden

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Stroke · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThrombolysisIntracerebral hemorrhageOdds ratioStroke (engine)Confidence intervalAsymptomaticCohortInternal medicineTissue plasminogen activatorCohort studySurgeryMyocardial infarctionSubarachnoid hemorrhage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Two clinical risk scores, the Haemorrhage After Thrombolysis and Multicentre Stroke Survey scores, have been proposed to predict the risk of intracerebral haemorrhage following thrombolysis in acute ischaemic stroke. AIMS: To validate Haemorrhage After Thrombolysis and Multicentre Stroke Survey scores as predictors of post-tissue plasminogen activator symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage and asymptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage in an independent cohort. METHODS: Haemorrhage After Thrombolysis and Multicentre Stroke Survey scores were calculated for the cohort of tissue plasminogen activator-treated patients enrolled in the placebo arms of the SAINT-I and SAINT-II trials. The absolute risk of symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage and asymptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage associated with each scoring system was determined. The overall predictive value was assessed using c-statistics. RESULTS: Symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage occurred in 5.6% of 965 patients treated with tissue plasminogen activator in the SAINT cohorts. The risk of symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage was modestly greater, with higher Haemorrhage After Thrombolysis scores (0: 4.1%, 1: 4.1%, 2: 8.8%, 3: 12.5%, 4: 0%, 5: no subjects). Similar results were seen with the Multicentre Stroke Survey score (0: 0%, 1: 4.8%, 2: 2.3%, 3: 7.3%, 4: 6.3%). In logistic regression, the Haemorrhage After Thrombolysis score was associated with the risk of symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage (odds ratio = 1.41 per point, 95% confidence interval: 1.05-1.89, P = 0.021) and asymptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage (odds ratio = 1.59 per point, 95% confidence interval: 1.33-1.92, P< 0.001). The Multicentre Stroke Survey score was modestly associated with the risk of symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage (odds ratio = 1.43 per point, 95% confidence interval: 0.95-2.15, P = 0.084) and asymptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage (odds ratio = 1.63 per point, 95% confidence interval: 1.27-2.08, P < 0.001). The c-statistic was 0.59 for predicting symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage and 0.61 for asymptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage for both the Haemorrhage After Thrombolysis and the Multicentre Stroke Survey scores. CONCLUSIONS: While both the Haemorrhage After Thrombolysis and Multicentre Stroke Survey scores were associated with a risk of symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage, discriminatory ability was limited.

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations18
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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