MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170297325 · doi:10.1148/radiol.15142256

Multiphase CT Angiography: A New Tool for the Imaging Triage of Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke

2015· article· en· W2170297325 on OpenAlexafffund
Bijoy K. Menon, Christopher D. d’Esterre, Emmad Qazi, Mohammed Almekhlafi, L.J. Hahn, Andrew M. Demchuk, Mayank Goyal

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical CentreUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineAngiographyReceiver operating characteristicRadiologyModified Rankin ScaleTriageInter-rater reliabilityConfidence intervalStroke (engine)Computed tomography angiographyInternal medicineIschemiaIschemic strokeRating scaleEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To describe the use of an imaging selection tool, multiphase computed tomographic (CT) angiography, in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and to demonstrate its interrater reliability and ability to help determine clinical outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The local ethics board approved this study. Data are from the pilot phase of PRoveIT, a prospective observational study analyzing utility of multimodal imaging in the triage of patients with AIS. Patients underwent baseline unenhanced CT, single-phase CT angiography of the head and neck, multiphase CT angiography, and perfusion CT. Multiphase CT angiography generates time-resolved images of pial arteries. Pial arterial filling was scored on a six-point ordinal scale, and interrater reliability was tested. Clinical outcomes included a 50% or greater decrease in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) over 24 hours and 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0-2. The ability to predict clinical outcomes was compared between single-phase CT angiography, multiphase CT angiography, and perfusion CT by using receiver operating curve analysis, Akaike information criterion (AIC), and Bayesian information criterion (BIC). RESULTS: A total of 147 patients were included. Interrater reliability for multiphase CT angiography is excellent (n = 30, κ = 0.81, P < .001). At receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, the ability to predict clinical outcome is modest (C statistic = 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.52, 0.63 for ≥50% decrease in NIHSS over 24 hours; C statistic = 0.6, 95% CI: 0.53, 0.68 for 90-day mRS score of 0-2) but better than that of models using single-phase CT angiography and perfusion CT (P < .05 overall). With AIC and BIC, models that use multiphase CT angiography are better than models that use single-phase CT angiography and perfusion CT for a decrease of 50% or more in NIHSS over 24 hours (AIC = 166, BIC = 171.7; values were lowest for multiphase CT angiography) and a 90-day mRS score of 0-2 (AIC = 132.1, BIC = 137.4; values were lowest for multiphase CT angiography). CONCLUSION: Multiphase CT angiography is a reliable tool for imaging selection in patients with AIS.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations686
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiologySame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207