MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2269643705 · doi:10.1161/str.45.suppl_1.wmp23

Abstract W MP23: About 30% of Wake-up Stroke Patients May be Candidate for the tPA Therapy Using Negative-FLAIR as a Tissue Clock

2014· article· en· W2269643705 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
K Nagai, Kazumi Kimura, Junya Aoki, Kensaku Shibazaki, Takuya Ebata, Takahiro Sato, Naoki Saji, Junichi Uemura

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluid-attenuated inversion recoveryMedicineStroke (engine)ThrombolysisInterquartile rangeMagnetic resonance imagingInternal medicineCardiologyRadiologyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Purpose: Most of the wake-up stroke (WUS) patients cannot be treated using intravenous thrombolysis (tPA) because of unknown onset time. Recent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies reported that WUS patients may be the candidates for tPA therapy when showing no ischemia on the fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (negative-FLAIR), because negative FLAIR indicates the stroke onset to be within 4.5 h. The aim of the present study is 1) to investigate the frequency of WUS and the clinical and MRI findings of the WUS patients, and 2) calculate how many WUS patients with negative-FLAIR met the tPA criteria except the time parameter. Methods: Consecutive acute stroke patients with anterior-circulation within 12 of onset were enrolled. All patients were examined using diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), and FLAIR on admission. WUS was defined as stroke on awaking. Neurological severity was assessed using the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score. As a large infarction that is excluded from tPA therapy, the DWI-the Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score (DWI-ASPECTS) of ≤3 was defined. Result: A total of 619 consecutive patients were included in the study. The number of the WUS patients (WUS group) was 117 (19%), and the other (non-WUS group) was 502 (81%). Median NIHSS score on admission was 9 (interquartile range, 3-17) in the WUS group and 8 (3-16) in the non-WUS group (p=0.339). DWI-ASPECTS was similar between the WUS and the non-WUS groups (9 [7-10] vs. 9 [6-10], p=0.994). The number of patients treated using tPA was significantly smaller in WUS group compared to the non-WUS group (3 [3%] vs. 140 [28%], p<0.001). MRI study revealed that negative-FLAIR was seen in 50 (43%) of the 117 patients in the WUS group. Of the 50 patients with negative-FLAIR, 16 patients were excluded from the tPA therapy, the large infarction (6), platelet count <100,000 /mm (2), INR >1.7 (1), recent operation (1), and high blood pressure greater than 185/110 mmHg (6). Therefore, 34 (29%) of the 117 wake-up stroke patients met the tPA criteria. Conclusion: About 30% of the WUS patients may be candidate for the tPA therapy using the negative-FLAIR findings.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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