Topographic distribution of cerebral infarct probability in patients with acute ischemic stroke: mapping of intra-arterial treatment effect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since proof emerged that IA treatment (IAT) is beneficial for patients with acute ischemic stroke, it has become the standard method of care. Despite these positive results, recovery to functional independence is established in only about one-third of treated patients. The effect of IAT is commonly assessed by functional outcome, whereas its effect on brain tissue salvage is considered a secondary outcome measure (at most). Because patient and treatment selection needs to be improved, understanding the treatment effect on brain tissue salvage is of utmost importance. OBJECTIVE: To introduce infarct probability maps to estimate the location and extent of tissue damage based on patient baseline characteristics and treatment type. METHODS: Cerebral infarct probability maps were created by combining automatically segmented infarct distributions using follow-up CT images of 281 patients from the MR CLEAN trial. Comparison of infarct probability maps allows visualization and quantification of probable treatment effects. Treatment impact was calculated for 10 Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) and 27 anatomical regions. RESULTS: The insular cortex had the highest infarct probability in both control and IAT populations (47.2% and 42.6%, respectively). Comparison showed significant lower infarct probability in 4 ASPECTS and 17 anatomical regions in favor of IAT. Most salvaged tissue was found within the ASPECTS M2 region, which was 8.5% less likely to infarct. CONCLUSIONS: Probability maps intuitively visualize the topographic distribution of infarct probability due to treatment, which makes it a promising tool for estimating the effect of treatment.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".