MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896376620 · doi:10.1161/str.49.suppl_1.wp180

Abstract WP180: Recanalization Predicts Prognosis After Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2018· review· en· W2896376620 on OpenAlexaff
Asaf Honig, Amir A. Sepehry, Deepa Suryanarayan, Thalia S. Field

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineModified Rankin ScaleOdds ratioMeta-analysisVenous thrombosisIntracranial ThrombosisThrombosisStroke (engine)SurgeryInternal medicineRadiologyIschemic strokeIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Guidelines recommend a 3-12 month duration of anticoagulation for cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) and a repeat venogram at 3-6 months to assess recanalization. However, the relationship between recanalization and prognosis is not well defined. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to clarify the association between venous recanalization and prognosis in CVT. Methods: We performed a literature search to identify all published studies that evaluated recanalization and prognosis in adult patients with a diagnosis of CVT treated with anticoagulation. Studies were identified using MEDLINE and EMBASE databases (1946 - 2017). Recanalization was ascertained by repeat venogram (CT, MR or conventional) and degree of recanalization was characterized as complete, partial or absent. Prognosis was defined using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS, 0-1 = excellent outcome). Results: We found 675 articles and conference abstracts. Thirty-five were appropriate for full-text review and 11 had information regarding recanalization and clinical outcome, accounting for 450 subjects in total. All but one study had clinical and neuro-imaging reassessments within 12 months. Eighty-five percent had complete or partial recanalization within one year. Eighty-seven percent had an excellent outcome (mRS 0-1). As compared with complete or partial recanalization, those with no recanalization had a significantly increased odds of an mRS of 2-6 (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.5 - 7.2, p=0.003). There was no significant difference in odds of worse prognosis for those with partial recanalization versus full recanaliation. No recanalization also carried a higher odds of CVT recurrence (OR 7.2, 95% CI 1.5 - 33, p=0.01) and chronic headache (OR 3.8, 95% CI 1.6 - 9.0, p=0.002). Conclusion: Absence of recanalization is associated with a poorer prognosis in CVT patients. There does not appear to be a dose-response relationship with regards to degree of recanalization (partial versus complete) and prognosis.

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)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.024
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicCerebral Venous Sinus ThrombosisFrench-language works237,207