MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2897413297 · doi:10.1161/str.49.suppl_1.tp220

Abstract TP220: TIA Referral Influences Delay of Evaluation in TIA Clinic

2018· article· en· W2897413297 on OpenAlexaff
Nicolas Raposo, Jean François Albucher, Vanessa Rousseau, Agnès Sommet, Lionel Calvière, Alain Viguier, Nathalie Nasr, Fabrice Bonneville, François Chollet, Jean‐Marc Olivot

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsCollège Lionel Groulx
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)Minor strokeReferralLogistic regressionEmergency departmentUnivariate analysisEmergency medicineInternal medicineMultivariate analysisPediatricsPhysical therapyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Transient ischemic attacks and minor stroke are vascular emergencies associated with a high risk of brain infarction within the first hours after onset. When available those patients may be evaluated and managed in a TIA clinic. Several therapeutic strategies are currently tested within 12 hrs after TIA/minor stroke onset. We aim to investigate the factors associated with a delay of evaluation longer than 12 hours in our TIA clinic. Subjects and Methods: Subjects are consecutive patients evaluated in an academic center TIA clinic during 2 years. Briefly patients were evaluated by a certified stroke neurologist according to 2009 AHA recommendations including MRI, vessel imaging, blood tests, EKG and when needed TTE/TEE. Referring pathways were dichotomized between office based physicians (General practitioners, others:cardiologists, ophtalmologists, ...) and Emergency medical service (local and from other hospital with no neurologists). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were performed. Results: 354 patients were evaluated in 2 years. Mean (+/- SD) age was 61 YO (18), Median (IQR) ABCD2 score was 3 (2-4); median (IQR) delay from onset to evaluation was 8 hours (4-48), 59% of patients did arrive in TIA clinic within 12 hours after onset. 52% were referred by an office based physician (36% general practitioner and 16% others) vs. 48% by ED (32%,local ED and EMS 16% other ED) Univariate analysis showed that ABCD2 score<4 and office based physician referral were associated with a delay>12 hrs. There was no relationships with other factors such as risk factors, previous history of stroke or recurrent TIA. Office based physician referral was the only independent factor associated with a delay of evaluation > 12 hrs OR 5.7, (95%CI:3.5-9.3, p<0.0001) after multivariate logistic regression. Conclusion: Direct referral from ED increases the rate of patients starting their evaluation in TIA clinic within 12 hrs after onset.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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