Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a known risk factor for stroke. Furthermore, it has been suggested that the severity of the stroke is increased in these patients. We studied the clinical characteristics, radiologic findings, in-hospital outcome and prognosis of stroke in patients with AF. METHODS: All patients who were admitted due to an stroke in our Hospital since March 1, 1995 from May 15, 1997 have been analysed. They were divided in two groups, according to the presence or not of AF and we analysed: vascular risk factors, clinical characteristics, radiologic findings, in-hospital outcome and Barthel index and Canadian score on admission and at discharge. RESULTS: 747 patients were analysed, 205 (27.4%) with AF and 542 without it. The mean age was higher in patients with AF (p < 0.001). The ischemic stroke/cerebral hemorrhage ratio was higher in patients with AF than in those without it (OR: 3.91). We found in 3/4 of patients with AF, clinical data supporting the embolic etiology. In the AF group, Barthel index on admission and at discharge and Canadian score on admission were significantly lower. Patients with AF had more complications, a higher mortality rate, longer hospital stays and lower discharge rate to their own home. CONCLUSIONS: AF is independently related with a greater severity and worse outcome in patients suffering acute stroke. These findings emphasize the importance of stroke prevention in patients with AF.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.039 | 0.015 |
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".