MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2753015234 · doi:10.1161/str.43.suppl_1.a3118

Abstract 3118: Star: Solitaire Fr Thrombectomy For Acute Revascularisation, International Clinical Evaluation Of The Solitaire™ Fr Used In The Treatment Of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke

2012· article· en· W2753015234 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vítor Mendes Pereira, Alain Bonafé, Carlos Castaño, René Chapot, Michael Besselman, Jan Gralla

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSolitaire Cryptographic AlgorithmClinical endpointStroke (engine)RevascularizationObservational studyTIMIAdverse effectPopulationIncidence (geometry)SurgeryInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialThrombolysisIschemic strokeIschemiaMyocardial infarctionModified Rankin Scale

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: The aim of the study is to evaluate mechanical thrombectomy with the Solitaire FR when used according to hospitals’ stroke protocols (direct intra-arterial, bridging IV/IA and endovascular after failed or contraindicated IV lysis). Design: Single arm, observational, multi-center, prospective study with consecutive inclusion. Sample size: The target number of patients is 200 in 20 centers with a maximum of 30 patients per center. Centers: 2 centers in Switzerland, 9 centers in Germany, 1 in Austria, 4 centers in Spain, 1 in Canada, 1 in Australia, 1 in Portugal, 1 in France. Study population: Patients presenting with acute ischemic stroke in anterior circulation, aged 18-85 years. Baseline NIH stroke scale between 8 and 30. Pre-stroke mRS ≤2. Treatment initiated within 8 hours of symptom onset. Meet specific imaging criteria based on ASPECT score. Interventions: Patients will be treated with the Solitaire FR Revascularization Device used as 1st intention device in routine practice. Endpoints: Primary endpoint will be recanalization of the occluded vessel, core lab reviewed, using TICI score with TICI 2b and 3 defined as successful recanalization. Correspondent TIMI scores will be determined for comparison with other studies. Safety endpoint: Adverse events related to the device or the procedure. All adverse events will be reviewed by an independent clinical event committee. Secondary endpoints: Time to revascularization, NIHSS at 90 days, mRS at 90 days, incidence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, immediate flow reperfusion. Trial status: Enrollment is ongoing. There are currently 7 enrolling centers with a total of 37 patients. Registers: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01327989

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management→French-language works237,207→