Intravenous rt-PA for acute stroke: comparing its effectiveness in younger and older patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study the short and long term differences in outcome between patients > or =80 years of age and those < or =79 years of age who received intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (iv rt-PA) for acute stroke within the first 3 hours of symptom onset. METHODS: We studied consecutive patients treated with iv rt-PA for acute stroke, with prospective follow up of up to 3 years. Outcome measures included National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score, Barthel Index (BI), modified Rankin score (MRS), and stroke mortality. Patients were split into two groups: younger (< or =79 years) and older (> or =80 years). RESULTS: There were 65 patients in the younger cohort and 31 patients in the older. Older patients were more likely to present with more severe baseline stroke (p = 0.04; odds ratio (OR) 3.04; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 8.98). Stroke mortality at 90 days was 10.8% in the younger and 32.3% in the older cohort (p = 0.01). At 90 days' follow up, patients in the older cohort with more severe stroke (NIHSS score > or =11) were nearly 10 times more likely to have poor outcome compared with their younger counterparts presenting with severe stroke (p = 0.001; OR = 10.36; 95% CI 2.16 to 49.20). Baseline stroke severity and age were the only independent and equal predictors for stroke outcome. No threshold was found for age or baseline stroke severity predicting outcome. CONCLUSION: Older patients presenting with more severe baseline stroke are much less likely to benefit from iv rt-PA as compared with their younger counterparts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".