Quality of Care and Outcomes for Patients With Stroke in the United States Admitted During the International Stroke Conference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Patients presenting to hospitals during non-weekday hours experience worse outcomes, often attributed to reduced staffing. The American Heart Association International Stroke Conference ( ISC ) is well attended by stroke clinicians. We sought to determine whether patients with acute ischemic stroke ( AIS ) admitted during the ISC receive less guideline-adherent care and experience worse outcomes. Methods and Results We performed a retrospective cohort study of US hospitals participating in Get With The Guidelines-Stroke and assessed use of intravenous tissue plasminogen activator, other quality measures, and outcomes for patients with AIS admitted during the ISC compared with those admitted the weeks before and after the conference. A total of 69 738 patients with AIS were included: mean age, 72 years; 52% women; 29% nonwhite. There was no difference between the average weekly number of AIS cases admitted during ISC weeks versus non- ISC weeks (1984 versus 1997; P=0.95). Patient and hospital characteristics were similar between ISC and non- ISC time periods. There were no significant differences in 14 quality metrics and 5 clinical outcomes between patients with AIS treated during the ISC versus non- ISC weeks. Patients with AIS who presented within 2 hours of onset had no difference in the likelihood of receiving intravenous tissue plasminogen activator within 3 hours (adjusted odds ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-1.03; P=0.13) or the likelihood of receiving intravenous tissue plasminogen activator within 60 minutes of arrival (adjusted odds ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-1.02; P=0.13). Conclusions Patients with acute stroke admitted to Get With The Guidelines-Stroke hospitals during ISC received the same quality care and had similar outcomes as patients admitted at other times.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".