MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2776905393 · doi:10.1177/1460458217747111

Validation of a multivariate clinical prediction model for the diagnosis of mild stroke/transient ischemic attack in physician first-contact patient settings

2017· article· en· W2776905393 on OpenAlexafffund
Maximilian B. Bibok, Andrew M. Penn, Mary Lesperance, Kristine Votova, Robert Balshaw

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Informatics Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsBC Centre for Disease ControlUniversity of VictoriaIsland Health
FundersHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMedicineTriageCohortReferralInternal medicineEmergency departmentMultivariate analysisCohort studyStroke (engine)Emergency medicineFamily medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We validate our previously developed (DOI: 10.1101/089227) clinical prediction rule for diagnosing transient ischemic attack on the basis of presenting clinical symptoms and compare its performance with the ABCD2 score in first-contact patient settings. Two independent and prospectively collected patient validation cohorts were used: (a) referral cohort–prospectively referred emergency department and general practitioner patients ( N = 877); and (b) SpecTRA cohort–participants recruited as part of the SpecTRA biomarker project ( N = 545). Outcome measure consisted of imaging-confirmed clinical diagnosis of mild stroke/transient ischemic attack. Results showed that our clinical prediction rule demonstrated significantly higher accuracy than the ABCD2 score for both the referral cohort (70.5% vs 59.0%; p < 0.001) and SpecTRA cohort (72.8% vs 68.3%; p = 0.028). We discuss the potential of our clinical prediction rule to replace the use of the ABCD2 score in the triage of transient ischemic attack clinic referrals.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Informatics JournalSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207