ASPECTS-based reperfusion status on arterial spin labeling is associated with clinical outcome in acute ischemic stroke patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to develop and evaluate a scoring system for assessing reperfusion status based on arterial spin labeled (ASL) perfusion MRI in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients receiving thrombolysis and/or endovascular treatment. Pseudo-continuous ASL with background suppressed 3D GRASE was acquired along with DWI in 90 patients within 24 h post-treatment. An automatic reperfusion scoring system (auto-RPS) was devised based on the Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) template, and compared with manual RPS and DWI-ASPECTS. TICI (thrombolysis in cerebral infarction) scores were graded in 48 patients who received endovascular treatment. Favorable outcomes were defined by a modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2 at three months. Auto-RPS was positively correlated with DWI-ASPECTS (ρ = 0.6, P < 0.001) and was on average 1 point lower than DWI-ASPECTS ( P < 0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for discriminating poor functional outcome (n = 90) was 0.75 (95% CI, 0.64-0.86) for manual RPS, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.76-0.94) for auto-RPS, and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.71-0.90) for DWI-ASPECTS. Multiple logistic regression analysis in the TICI-graded patients (n = 48) showed that auto-RPS is highly associated with functional outcome (OR = 25.2, 95% CI 4.02-496, P < 0.01). Post treatment auto-RPS within 24 h provides a useful tool to predict functional outcome in AIS patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 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".