MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2239589499 · doi:10.1161/str.45.suppl_1.142

Abstract 142: ASPECTS Decay During Inter-Facility Transfer Predicts Patient Outcomes in Endovascular Reperfusion for Ischemic Stroke: A Unique Assessment of Dynamic Physiologic Change Over Time

2014· article· en· W2239589499 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chung‐Huan Sun, Raul G. Nogueira, Kerrin M Connelly, Brenda A Glenn, Susan Zimmermann, Kim Anda, Deborah Camp, Susan Gaunt, Michele Eckenroth, Michael Frankel, Samir Belagaje, Aaron Anderson, Fadi Nahab, Manuel Yepes, Rishi Gupta

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)Logistic regressionCohortInternal medicineCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: In acute ischemic stroke, delays in reperfusion lead to a reduced probability of good clinical outcomes. Pre-treatment Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Scores (ASPECTS) are also associated with clinical outcomes, but the rate of change between subsequent CT images in transferred patients may be more predictive as it incorporates time. We hypothesized that patients with significant change in ASPECT scores would have worse clinical outcomes despite having a favorable pre-treatment baseline ASPECTS. Methods: A cohort of patients transferred from seven Primary Stroke Centers and treated with endovascular reperfusion (December 15, 2010 to March 15, 2013) were retrospectively studied. All patients were analyzed with respect to radiographic, demographic, and time-related variables. Absolute ASPECTS decay was defined as [(ASPECTS First CT - ASPECTS Second CT)/time elapsed between CTs in hours]. A binary logistic regression model was performed to determine if the rate of ASPECTS decay was predictive of good 90 day outcomes (mRS 0-2). Results: A total of 106 patients with a mean age of 66±14 years and median NIHSS of 19 [IQR 15-23] were analyzed. The median time between initial imaging at the outside hospital to repeat imaging at our treatment facility was 2.7 hours (IQR 2.0-3.6). Patients with good outcomes had lower rates of absolute ASPECTS decay compared to those who did not (0.14±0.23 score/hr vs. 0.49±0.39 score/hr; p<0.001). In multivariable modeling, the absolute rate of ASPECTS decay (OR 0.043; 95%CI 0.004-0.457; p=0.01) was a stronger predictor of good patient outcome than the static pre-treatment ASPECTS obtained immediately before intervention (OR 0.653; 95%CI 0.39-1.05; p=0.076). Practically, patients with a decay of two ASPECTS points per hour compared to those who decay at one point per hour had a 23 fold lower probability of a good outcome. Conclusions: Our analysis demonstrates that patients with faster rates of ASPECTS decay are associated with worse clinical outcomes, reflecting the rate of physiological infarct expansion. This metric may be valuable in selecting patients for IAT, as patients with rapid ASPECTS decay are less likely to derive treatment benefit, particularly with delays in inter-facility transfers and procedure times.

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)0.004
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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