MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2915245291 · doi:10.1177/1591019919827505

DWI-pc-ASPECT score in basilar artery occlusion: is 6 points or less always indicative of a bad outcome?

2019· article· en· W2915245291 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInterventional Neuroradiology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineModified Rankin ScaleBasilar arteryOcclusionStroke (engine)SurgeryRadiologyInternal medicineIschemiaIschemic stroke

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and purpose The prognosis of patients with acute basilar arterial occlusion after endovascular reperfusion therapy with diffusion-weighted imaging – posterior circulation–Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score (DWI-pc-ASPECTS) of 6 or less remains unclear. We aimed to assess the characteristics and prognosis of endovascular reperfusion therapy in patients with acute basilar arterial occlusion and DWI-pc-ASPECTS of 6 or less. Methods We analysed data collected from 1 January 2012 to 31 January 2018 in a prospective neuro-interventional registry of consecutive patients treated with endovascular reperfusion therapy. Clinical and imaging data on patients with DWI-pc-ASPECTS of 6 or less who underwent endovascular reperfusion therapy for acute basilar arterial occlusion were collected for this study. A good clinical outcome was defined as a modified Rankin scale of 2 or less at 90 days. Results Forty-five acute basilar arterial occlusion patients with DWI-pc-ASPECTS of 6 or less were included. Among them, 11 (24.4%) patients had a good clinical outcome at 90 days. Patients with a good clinical outcome had less severe neurological symptoms at presentation (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) 19.0 (12.0–25.0) vs. 8.0 (6.0–11.5); P = 0.003) and were younger (72.5 years (57.0–80.0 years) vs. 63.0 years (55.5–69.0 years), P = 0.096) than those with a poor clinical outcome. The symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage rate was significantly higher in the poor clinical outcome group (13 (38.2%)) than in the good clinical outcome group (0 (0.0%)) ( P = 0.045). In particular, in patients aged over 70 years, a favourable outcome was low (18 (52.9%) vs. 1 (9.1%); P = 0.027) even after successful recanalisation. In a multivariate model, a low initial NIHSS score (odds ratio 1.21; 95% confidence interval 1.07–1.44; P = 0.0093) and age over 70 years (odds ratio 15.27; 95% confidence interval 1.85–379.79; P = 0.0321) were independent predictors of poor clinical outcome. Conclusions Even with DWI-pc-ASPECTS of 6 or less, good clinical outcome can be achieved after endovascular reperfusion therapy. Relatively mild initial symptoms and younger age can predict a better outcome in acute basilar arterial occlusion patients with DWI-pc-ASPECTS of 6 or less.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.274 · 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