MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Cervical Artery Dissections in the Vancouver General Hospital (VGH) Stroke Database: A common stroke mechanism? (P5.161)

2015· article· en· W2186589968 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laura Wilson, Athari Salmeen, Thalia S. Field, Samuel Yip

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStroke (engine)MedicineCervical ArteryMechanism (biology)CardiologyInternal medicineDissection (medical)Surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Cervical Artery Dissection (CAD) is a relatively rare mechanism of ischemic stroke. Various hospital-based and population-based registries report incidence rates between 1.0-3.0 per 100,000 per year. Objective: To evaluate demographic features, characteristics, presentation and discharge outcome in all cervical artery dissection patients registered in the VGH stroke database. Design/Methods: A database of all patients referred to the VGH stroke service was launched in January 2014. All patients diagnosed with arterial dissection from January 1 through June 30, 2014 were included in this preliminary analysis. Demographic features, radiographic findings, management and discharge disposition were recorded. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize findings. Results: Over a 6 month period, 675 patients were referred from the emergency room and inpatient wards for stroke consultation. Among the 438 patients with TIA/Ischemic stroke, 26 were identified to have CAD (5.9[percnt], mean age 49.1 ± 15.1 years, 54[percnt] female). This included 13 patients with internal carotid artery (ICA) dissection (1 bilateral ICA) and 12 patients with vertebral artery dissection (4 bilateral vertebral arteries). One patient presented with both ICA and vertebral artery dissections. Only 1 patient was found to have an intracranial dissection. Acutely, 4 patients were treated with IV tPA. Following discharge, most were treated with either dual antiplatelets (38.5[percnt]) or aspirin alone (34.6[percnt]). The majority of patients were discharged home (73.1[percnt]) or to a rehabilitation facility (15.4[percnt]). Conclusion: In this preliminary review, we have identified 26 patients with CAD in the first 6 months of our database collection. Although these results are from a single centre, this incidence of cervical artery dissection is much higher than expected. This analysis is ongoing and we will assess race-ethnicity, presenting features and preceding history of trauma and infection.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.871
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurology→Same topicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications→French-language works237,207→