MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789502373 · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.117.019861

Improving Community Stroke Preparedness in the HHS (Hip-Hop Stroke) Randomized Clinical Trial

2018· article· en· W2789502373 on OpenAlexaff
Olajide Williams, Ellyn Leighton-Herrmann Quinn, Jeanne A. Teresi, Joseph P. Eimicke, Jian Kong, Gbenga Ogedegbe, James M. Noble

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Population and Public Health
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)Randomized controlled trialPreparednessPhysical therapyClinical trialAcute strokePhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgeryInternal medicineEmergency departmentNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Purpose— Deficiencies in stroke preparedness cause major delays to stroke thrombolysis, particularly among economically disadvantaged minorities. We evaluated the effectiveness of a stroke preparedness intervention delivered to preadolescent urban public school children on the stroke knowledge/preparedness of their parents. Methods— We recruited 3070 fourth through sixth graders and 1144 parents from 22 schools into a cluster randomized trial with schools randomized to the HHS (Hip-Hop Stroke) intervention or attentional control (nutrition classes). HHS is a 3-hour culturally tailored, theory-based, multimedia stroke literacy intervention targeting school children, which systematically empowers children to share stroke information with parents. Our main outcome measures were stroke knowledge/preparedness of children and parents using validated surrogates. Results— Among children, it was estimated that 1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0%–1%) of controls and 2% (95% CI, 1%–4%; P =0.09) of the intervention group demonstrated optimal stroke preparedness (perfect scores on the knowledge/preparedness test) at baseline, increasing to 57% (95% CI, 44%–69%) immediately after the program in the intervention group compared with 1% (95% CI, 0%–1%; P <0.001) among controls. At 3-month follow-up, 24% (95% CI, 15%–33%) of the intervention group retained optimal preparedness, compared with 2% (95% CI, 0%–3%; P <0.001) of controls. Only 3% (95% CI, 2%–4%) of parents in the intervention group could identify all 4 letters of the stroke FAST (Facial droop, Arm weakness, Speech disturbance, Time to call 911) acronym at baseline, increasing to 20% at immediate post-test (95% CI, 16%–24%) and 17% at 3-month delayed post-test (95% CI, 13%–21%; P =0.0062), with no significant changes (3% identification) among controls. Four children, all in the intervention group, called 911 for real-life stroke symptoms, in 1 case overruling a parent’s wait-and-see approach. Conclusions— HHS is an effective, intergenerational model for increasing stroke preparedness among economically disadvantaged minorities. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01497886.

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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations60
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis MechanismsFrench-language works237,207