MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2143754643

Analysis of DWI ASPECTS and recanalization outcomes of patients with acute-phase cerebral infarction.

2012· article· en· W2143754643 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Keigo Shigeta, Kikuo Ohno, Yoshio Takasato, Hiroyuki Masaoka, Takanori Hayakawa, Hiroshi Yatsushige, Motoki Inaji, Kyoko Sumiyoshi, Toshiya Momose, Takuya Maeda, Jyuri Kiyokawa

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineModified Rankin ScaleInternal carotid arteryUnivariate analysisOcclusionIncidence (geometry)Middle cerebral arteryStroke (engine)Internal medicineMultivariate analysisDiffusion MRIRadiologyCerebral infarctionCardiologyMagnetic resonance imagingIschemic strokeIschemia
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to rapidly judge the response to intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (Ⅳ tPA) treatment, we retrospectively analyzed clinical data, such as MRI diffusion-weighted images (DWI), and treatment outcomes in 73 patients who developed anterior circulation disorders. The patients with favorable outcomes (modified Rankin Scale [mRS]: 2 or less) at discharge accounted for 32.9%. In these patients, the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) value, DWI Alberta Stroke Programme Early CT Score (ASPECTS), and the incidence of large artery (internal carotid artery [ICA]/sphenoidal segment of the middle cerebral artery [M1]) occlusion at their hospital visit were lower, higher, and lower, respectively (all P < 0.05 in univariate analysis). Multivariate analysis showed significant differences in DWI ASPECTS and the incidence of large artery occlusion. A DWI ASPECTS of at least 8 was found to be predictive of favorable outcomes. However, subclass analysis in the group with a DWI ASPECTS of 8 or higher predicting favorable outcome revealed 13 patients (41.9%) with unfavorable (mRS, 3-6) outcome. The factor associated with unfavorable outcomes is ICA occlusion. The combination of DWI ASPECTS and MRA appeared to be useful for predicting outcomes of Ⅳ tPA.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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