MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913869981 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000007142

WMH and long-term outcomes in ischemic stroke

2019· review· en· W2913869981 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marios K. Georgakis, Marco Duering, Joanna M. Wardlaw, Martin Dichgans

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilDeutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative ErkrankungenDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftStiftung zur Erforschung der Vaskulären DemenzEuropean Commission
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)DementiaInternal medicineRelative riskConfidence intervalHyperintensityCohort studyMeta-analysisCardiologyPhysical therapyMagnetic resonance imagingDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between baseline white matter hyperintensities (WMH) in patients with ischemic stroke and long-term risk of dementia, functional impairment, recurrent stroke, and mortality. METHODS: Following the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (PROSPERO protocol: CRD42018092857), we systematically searched Medline and Scopus for cohort studies of ischemic stroke patients examining whether MRI- or CT-assessed WMH at baseline are associated with dementia, functional impairment, recurrent stroke, and mortality at 3 months or later poststroke. We extracted data and evaluated study quality with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. We pooled relative risks (RR) for the presence and severity of WMH using random-effects models. RESULTS: We included 104 studies with 71,298 ischemic stroke patients. Moderate/severe WMH at baseline were associated with increased risk of dementia (RR 2.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.72-2.73), cognitive impairment (RR 2.29, 95% CI 1.48-3.54), functional impairment (RR 2.21, 95% CI 1.83-2.67), any recurrent stroke (RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.36-2.01), recurrent ischemic stroke (RR 1.90, 95% CI 1.26-2.88), all-cause mortality (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.47-2.01), and cardiovascular mortality (RR 2.02, 95% CI 1.44-2.83). The associations followed dose-response patterns for WMH severity and were consistent for both MRI- and CT-defined WMH. The results remained stable in sensitivity analyses adjusting for age, stroke severity, and cardiovascular risk factors, in analyses of studies scoring high in quality, and in analyses adjusted for publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: Presence and severity of WMH are associated with substantially increased risk of dementia, functional impairment, stroke recurrence, and mortality after ischemic stroke. WMH may aid clinical prognostication and the planning of future clinical trials.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations239
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207