Modifiable risk factors for intracerebral hemorrhage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To determine whether there are modifiable risk factors for spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage in patients receiving oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy. DESIGN Retrospective chart review between January 2002 and December 2004. PARTICIPANTS A total of 315 consecutive patients presenting with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Overall mortality rates and surgical mortality rates, and discharge home compared with discharge to a long-term care facility. RESULTS Of the 315 patients reviewed, 65 (20.6%) were receiving OAC therapy. Age, Glasgow Coma Scale score, and size of hematoma at presentation were similar in the 65 patients taking OAC and the 250 patients not taking it. Mean arterial pressure at presentation was significantly higher in the OAC group than in the control group (132 mm Hg vs 107 mm Hg, P = .01) as was the number of hematomas that progressed (52% vs 14%, P = .01). Overall mortality rates were higher in the OAC group than in the control group (52% vs 41%, P = .03) as were surgical mortality rates (62% vs 41%, P = .04). There were no significant differences in morbidity between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION Mortality rates were higher among patients taking OAC therapy despite their having similarly sized hematomas at presentation. The higher initial mean arterial pressure among such patients has not been described previously in this setting. This higher mean arterial pressure correlates with the propensity of these patients’ hematomas to expand after initial imaging and might partially mediate the mortality effect. In patients taking OAC, hypertension appears to be a modifiable risk factor for morbidity and mortality from intracerebral hemorrhage.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".