Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The aim of this systematic review was to quantify the risk of ipsilateral stroke in patients with asymptomatic carotid artery occlusion (ACAO). METHODS: Studies reporting ipsilateral stroke risk in ACAO were identified by a search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and study bibliographies. Study estimates were pooled using a random effects model, and heterogeneity was quantified using the I(2) statistic. The primary outcome was the annual rate of ipsilateral stroke. RESULTS: Thirteen studies were identified, encompassing 718 patients with ACAO who were followed up for a median of 2.8 years. The annual rate of ipsilateral stroke was 1.3% (95% confidence interval, 0.4-2.1; I(2)=53%). The annual rate of ipsilateral transient ischemic attack was 1.0% (95% confidence interval, 0.3-1.8; I(2)=40%). The annual rate of death was substantially higher at 7.7% (95% confidence interval, 4.3-11.2; I(2)=83%). Correction for possible publication bias for the primary outcome suggested a lower risk of ipsilateral stroke (0.3% per year; 95% confidence interval, -0.4 to 1.1). CONCLUSIONS: Stroke in ACAO is relatively infrequent, but patients face high mortality rates. This suggests the need for intensified medical therapy in ACAO.
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 | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".