Comparison of four different collateral scores in acute ischemic stroke by CT angiography
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Multiple scores have been described for the assessment of collateralization in acute ischemic stroke. Currently, there is no gold standard for collateral assessment by CT angiography (CTA). This study compared four frequently used collateral scores with regard to their correlation with early infarct core and mismatch ratio. METHODS: 30 consecutive patients with acute occlusion of the M1 segment or terminal carotid artery were reviewed retrospectively. Collaterals were assessed using dynamic and also single-phase CTA according to grading systems by the American Society of Interventional and Therapeutic Neuroradiology/Society of Interventional Radiology (ASITN/SIR), Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) (on collaterals), Christoforidis et al and Miteff et al. The Christoforidis and ASITN/SIR scores, which were initially designed for conventional angiography, were adapted to be applicable to CTA. The scores were compared with respect to early infarct core and mismatch ratio in perfusion CT estimated by RAPID software using Spearman correlation. RESULTS: ASITN/SIR and ASPECTS collateral scores showed good correlation with early infarct core (rho=-0.696, p<0.001 and rho=-0.677, p<0.001) and mismatch ratio (rho=0.609, p<0.001 and rho=0.581, p<0.001). In contrast, the Christoforidis and Miteff scores correlated less well with infarct core (rho=0.245, p=0.191 and rho=-0.272, p=0.145, respectively) and mismatch ratio (rho=-0.329, p=0.075 and rho=0.279, p=0.135, respectively). ASPECTS and ASITN/SIR showed excellent cross-correlation (rho=0.901, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the Christoforidis and Miteff scores, the modified ASITN/SIR and ASPECTS collateral scores showed consistently higher correlation with the extent of early infarct core and mismatch volume. This is probably because these scores evaluate the extent and delay of vascular enhancement in the affected territory rather than the backflow of contrast medium to the occlusion.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it