A.04 Anatomic variation of the Circle of Willis in perinatal stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Perinatal stroke is a common disorder in neonates with unknown etiology. Previous studies have linked anatomic variations in the Circle of Willis to adult stroke. This study aimed to understand the potential relationship between circle anatomy and common forms of perinatal stroke: NAIS, APPIS, and PVI. Methods: 94 subjects (62 NAIS/APPIS, and 32 PVI) were identified from the Alberta Perinatal Stroke Project. Inclusion criteria were: MRI-confirmed perinatal stroke, 3D-TOF MRA, and absence of other disorders. Images were classified as complete, incomplete posterior circulation, incomplete anterior circulation, and incomplete anterior and posterior circulation. Fisher Exact Test compared completeness against stroke type and segment absence ipsilateral to stroke. Mann-Whitney U compared completeness and lesion volume. Results: Completeness was more common in PVI than NAIS/APPIS (p=0.500) and in healthy controls than total stroke population (p=0.251). Ipsilesional absent segments were more frequent in NAIS/APPIS (p= 0.270). NAIS/APPIS patients with complete CoW had larger median lesion volume was compared to those with incomplete circles (p=0.484), with contralateral absence (p=0.943), and with ipsilateral absence (p=1.00). The opposite was found in PVI patients for all lesion volume comparisons (p=0.321, 0.362, 0.739 respectively). Conclusions: Circle anatomy is highly variable in perinatal stroke. Absence of segments is not associated with stroke type, lesion side, and lesion volume.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".