MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2107099343

Current management of acute ischemic stroke. Part 1: Thrombolytics and the 3-hour window.

2001· article· en· W2107099343 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony Herd

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTissue plasminogen activatorStroke (engine)Acute strokeIntensive care medicineMEDLINEThrombolysisAcute careClinical trialPlaceboRandomized controlled trialFibrinolytic agentMedical emergencyAlternative medicineEmergency medicineHealth careMyocardial infarctionSurgeryInternal medicinePathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To help family physicians who care for patients with acute stroke or who are involved in planning service delivery or resource allocation to understand recent developments in acute stroke care. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: A MEDLINE search indicated that most data were derived from well designed, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, including all the largest international studies and large systematic reviews. MAIN MESSAGE: Treatment of acute stroke with tissue plasminogen activator seems beneficial for certain patients with certain kinds of stroke. Because thrombolytic therapy is not without risk and requires substantial resources, it should be administered only by physicians trained in its use and in centres with the necessary experience and resources. Because time is important, an organized and efficient system of stroke care with collaboration between hospital and prehospital care providers and help from ordinary citizens is essential. CONCLUSION: Management of acute stroke is an emerging discipline; many potential therapies are still experimental.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management→French-language works237,207→