Side of Brain Infarction and Long-Term Risk of Sudden Death in Patients With Symptomatic Carotid Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Current publications suggest increased risk of sudden death in experimental animals with acute right insular lesions and in patients with recent right-sided brain infarction, particularly if the insula is involved. METHODS: Using 3 different time definitions, we related long-term risk of sudden death to presence and side of brain infarction on the baseline brain scan and handedness in 2885 patients with symptomatic carotid disease. RESULTS: In 1295 patients without brain infarction, 5-year risk of sudden death was 5.3% (24-hour definition); in those with left-sided infarction (n=471), 8.8%; in those with right-sided infarction (n=477), 6.0%; and in those with bilateral infarction (n=535), 9.7%. After accounting for differences of other risk factors (eg, previous myocardial infarction) in Cox regression, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) compared with no infarction were as follows: left-sided HR, 1.45 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00 to 2.10); right-sided HR, 0.96 (95% CI, 0.62 to 1.47); and bilateral HR, 1.40 (95% CI, 0.98 to 2.00). Insular infarction occurred in 41 patients; none died suddenly. Left-handed or ambidextrous patients (n=183) had a lower risk of sudden death than right-handers; the adjusted HR for left-handed or ambidextrous patients was 0.24 (95% Cl, 0.07 to 0.70). These results were essentially the same for the 10- and 60-minute definitions of sudden death. CONCLUSIONS: In the long-term, left-sided, not right-sided, brain infarction is associated with increased risk of sudden death. Left-handed or ambidextrous patients have a lower risk of sudden death than right-handed patients, suggesting a role for the brain.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".