Predicting Clinical Outcomes After Thrombolysis Using the iScore
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The ischemic stroke risk score (iScore) is a validated tool developed to estimate the risk of death and functional outcomes early after an acute ischemic stroke. Our goal was to determine the ability of the iScore to estimate clinical outcomes after intravenous thrombolysis tissue-type plasminogen activator (tPA) in the Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive (VISTA). METHODS: We applied the iScore (www.sorcan.ca/iscore) to patients with an acute ischemic stroke within the VISTA collaboration to examine the effect of tPA. We explored the association between the iScore (<200 and ≥200) and the primary outcome of favorable outcome at 3 months defined as a modified Rankin scale score of 0 to 2. Secondary outcomes included death at 3 months, catastrophic outcomes (modified Rankin scale, 4-6), and Barthel index >90 at 3 months. RESULTS: Among 7140 patients with an acute ischemic stroke, 2732 (38.5%) received tPA and 711 (10%) had an iScore ≥200. Overall, tPA treatment was associated with a significant improvement in the primary outcome among patients with an iScore <200 (38.9% non-tPA versus 47.5% tPA; P<0.001) but was not associated with a favorable outcome among patients with an iScore ≥200 (5.5% non-tPA versus 7.6% tPA; P=0.45). In the multivariable analysis after adjusting for age, baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, and onset-to-treatment time, there was a significant interaction between tPA administration and iScore; tPA administration was associated with 47% higher odds of a favorable outcome at 3 months among patients with an iScore <200 (odds ratio, 1.47; 95% confidence interval, 1.30-1.67), whereas the association between tPA and favorable outcome among those with an iScore ≥200 remained nonsignificant (odds ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.45-1.42). A similar pattern of benefit with tPA among patients with an iScore <200, but not ≥200, was observed for secondary outcomes including death. CONCLUSIONS: The iScore is a useful and validated tool that helps clinicians estimate stroke outcomes. In stroke patients participating in VISTA, an iScore <200 was associated with better outcomes at 3 months after 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".