MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2171240314 · doi:10.7861/clinmedicine.8-3-253

What is the place of thrombolysis in acute stroke? A review of the literature and a current perspective

2008· review· en· W2171240314 on OpenAlexaff
Peter O Jenkins, Martin R. Turner, Paul F Jenkins

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Medicine · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThrombolysisMedicineStroke (engine)Intensive care medicineClinical trialAcute strokeMyocardial infarctionPerspective (graphical)Tissue plasminogen activatorCardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The global burden of stroke, the undisputed success of intravenous thrombolysis in the management of myocardial infarction and subsequent evidence from animal models of cerebral infarction have all fuelled intense interest in the potential role for thrombolytic agents in the acute management of stroke in clinical practice. Before any clinical treatment is introduced universally its safety and efficacy must be demonstrated in the routine clinical environment and not just within the ideal conditions of controlled clinical trials. Similarly, the cost effectiveness of a new treatment modality is an essential consideration before its use is promulgated. This paper reviews the current scientific evidence for thrombolysis in stroke with reference to issues of safety, efficacy and cost effectiveness.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.387 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations7
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

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