Risk Factors for Leukoaraiosis in North American and Iranian Stroke Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Leukoaraiosis (LA) or white matter thinning and rarefaction are common in stroke patients. This pilot double-center study was designed to evaluate LA risk factors in stroke patients. Methods: This cross sectional study was conducted on 100 consecutive stroke patients in Walter Mackenzie Hospital, Canada and 100 consecutive stroke patients in Valie-Asr Hospital , Iran in 2004. Diagnosis of ischemic stroke and LA was performed by stroke neurologists using CT scan. The effects of race, gender, age groups, hypertension, diabetes, hypercholestrolemia and smoking on frequency rate of LA were evaluated. Results: The frequency rate of LA was the same in stroke patients living in North America or Iran. But, the frequency of LA in female stroke patients was more frequent than males (p<0.005). LA was significantly predominant in stroke patients with age≥65-yrs than those with age<65-yrs (p<0.05). The frequency of LA was significant in hypertensive patients. However, the frequency rate of LA was not influenced by diabetes, hypercholestrolemia and smoking. Conclusion: Female gender, age and hypertension seem to be the main risk factors of leukoaraiosis. In addition, there was no difference between the frequency rates of LA in patients living in Iran or North America.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".