Abstract 2: Good Outcome After Successful Recanalization is Time Dependent in the Swift Prime Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Purpose: The SWIFT PRIME trial demonstrated superior outcomes in patients presenting with disabling acute ischemic stroke (AIS) who underwent endovascular therapy vs. intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) alone. We sought to understand the relationship between functional independence and time to reperfusion in study patients assigned to thombectomy. Methods: SWIFT PRIME is a global, multi-center, prospective, randomized, open, blinded endpoint study comparing functional outcomes in AIS subjects treated with either IV t-PA alone or IV t-PA in combination with Solitaire stent retriever device. Among patients in whom substantial reperfusion (TICI 2b/3) was achieved, we analyzed the effect onindependent outcome (mRS 0-2) of time from stroke onset to reperfusion (OTR) and from qualifying imaging to reperfusion Results: Among 83 patients undergoing thrombectomy, substantial reperfusion was achieved in 73 (88%). A marked effect of OTR was noted (Figure 1A). The rate of functional independence was 87% if reperfusion was achieved 150 minutes from symptoms onset. The absolute rate of good outcomes decreased by 10% over the next 60 minutes of delay in OTR and by 15% with every 60 minute delay there-after. Faster post-arrival workflow speed improved outcomes among patients presenting directly to study hospitals (Figure 1B). Conclusions: Speed of reperfusion is a dominant determinant of functional outcome among patients treated with stent retrievers. In the early period after, every 6 minute delay in reperfusion causes 1 more out of 100 treated patients to not achieve functional independence.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".