Factors associated with delay in carotid endarterectomy for patients with symptomatic severe internal carotid artery stenosis: a case–control study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Canadian Best Practice Recommendations for Stroke Care (2008 update) recommend that patients with neurologic symptoms secondary to severe internal carotid artery stenosis undergo carotid endarterectomy within 14 days of symptom onset to prevent stroke. The purpose of this study was to identify patient and system factors associated with meeting, or failing to meet, the guideline. METHODS: In this case-control study, potential study participants were identified through an electronic search of the Discharge Abstract Database. We reviewed the charts of patients who presented to our centre with neurologic symptoms ipsilateral to internal carotid artery stenosis of 70%-99% and underwent carotid endarterectomy in our centre between Jan. 1, 2009, and Dec. 31, 2014. We performed logistic regression analysis to identify factors associated with meeting, or failing to meet, the guideline. RESULTS: Of the 412 patients who underwent carotid endarterectomy during the study period, 219 met the inclusion criteria. Sixty-seven patients (30.6%) met the 14-day guideline. Thirty (14.2%) of the 212 patients who could be classified as case or control subjects did not access the health care system within 14 days. Once in the health care system, failure to meet the guideline was associated with a presentation of amaurosis fugax (odds ratio [OR] 0.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.05-0.96 compared to completed minor stroke) and presentation to a nonemergency outpatient setting (OR 9.08, 95% CI 2.51-32.80 compared to emergency department). INTERPRETATION: Improvements in meeting the goal of carotid endarterectomy within 14 days of symptom onset for severe internal carotid artery stenosis should be directed at patient and system factors. A system for rapid diagnosis and referral of symptomatic patients to an appropriate surgeon should be established.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".