MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2635136214 · doi:10.1161/str.47.suppl_1.120

Abstract 120: Cortical Superficial Siderosis in Community-dwelling Subjects: The Framingham Heart and Rotterdam Studies

2016· article· en· W2635136214 on OpenAlexaff
Ashkan Shoamanesh, Saloua Akoudad, Jayandra Himali, Alexa Beiser, Charles DeCarli, Sudha Seshadri, M. Arfan Ikram, José R. Romero, Meike W. Vernooij

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research
Canadian institutionsPopulation Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCerebral amyloid angiopathySuperficial siderosisMedicineRotterdam StudyFramingham Heart StudyIntracerebral hemorrhageInternal medicinePopulationStroke (engine)Framingham Risk ScoreCardiologyCohortCohort studyDementiaDiseaseSubarachnoid hemorrhage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Cortical superficial siderosis (cSS) is increasingly recognized as an imaging marker of cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) in clinical settings. In these hospital-based cohorts, cSS seems to be a robust indicator of increased risk of future intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). cSS is also described in community-dwelling individuals, but current understanding of underlying pathology and prognostic implications in this setting is limited. We characterized cSS, its determinants and consequences, compared with another MRI marker of CAA (lobar cerebral microbleeds [CMBs]) in community-dwelling older adults by combining individual-level data from two large population cohorts. Methods: We evaluated cSS in Framingham Original/Offspring Cohort and Rotterdam Study participants ≥ 55 years of age who underwent brain MRI allowing for cSS and CMB detection. In cross-sectional analysis, we compared vascular risk factors/medications, MRI markers of interest, apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotypes (ε3/ε3 as control), and clinical outcomes (ICH, ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, and mild cognitive impairment) amongst participants with cSS and those without cSS/CMBs, as well as individuals with strictly lobar CMBs (without cSS). Results: cSS was present in 0.4% (26) of 6049 participants and strictly lobar CMBs in 13% (776). In comparison to participants with neither cSS nor CMBs and to those with strictly lobar CMBs, participants with cSS were older (OR per year increase 1.1, 95% CI 1.1-1.1 and 1.1, 1.0-1.1, respectively), and had overrepresentation of APOE ε4 (at least 1 ε4 allele; age/sex adjusted OR 5.23, 2.1-13.3 and 3.5, 1.4-9.0), and ICH (42, 7-251 and 31, 3.8-253). There also existed a trend toward overrepresentation of the APOE ε2 allele in participants with cSS (2.8, 0.9-8.8, p=0.08 and 2.7, 0.8-8.5, p=0.10). The association with ICH withstood additional adjustment for white matter hyperintensity volume and lacunes on MRI. Conclusions: In this large population-based study of cSS, the prevalence of cSS was low but presence of cSS was more strongly associated with markers of CAA, such as APOE genotype and ICH, than presence of lobar microbleeds without cSS, suggesting that cSS may reflect advanced CAA even in community-dwelling subjects.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage ResearchFrench-language works237,207