MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952093075 · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.119.025384

Left Atrial Volume Index Is Associated With Cardioembolic Stroke and Atrial Fibrillation Detection After Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source

2019· article· en· W2952093075 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Jordan, Shadi Yaghi, Athena Poppas, Andrew Chang, Brian Mac Grory, Shawna Cutting, Tina Burton, Mahesh Jayaraman, Georgios Tsivgoulis, M. Khaled Sabeh, Alexander E. Merkler, Hooman Kamel, Mitchell S.V. Elkind, Karen L. Furie, Christopher Song

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationStroke (engine)CardiologyInternal medicineEmbolic strokeOdds ratioUnivariate analysisProspective cohort studyLogistic regressionIschemic strokeMultivariate analysisIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Purpose— Left atrial enlargement has been shown to be associated with ischemic stroke, but the association with embolic stroke mechanisms remains unknown. We aim to study the associations between left atrial volume index (LAVI) and embolic stroke subtypes and atrial fibrillation (AF) detection on cardiac event monitoring in patients with embolic stroke of unknown source. Methods— Data were collected from a prospective cohort of consecutive patients with ischemic stroke admitted to a comprehensive stroke center over 18 months. Stroke subtype was classified into cardioembolic stroke, noncardioembolic stroke of determined mechanism (NCE), or embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS). Univariate and prespecified multivariable analyses were performed to assess associations between LAVI and stroke subtype and AF detection in patients with ESUS. Results— Of 1224 consecutive patients identified during the study period, 1020 (82.6%) underwent transthoracic echocardiography and had LAVI measurements. LAVI was greater in patients with cardioembolic stroke than NCE (41.4 mL/m 2 ±18.0 versus 28.6 mL/m 2 ±12.2; P <0.001) but not in ESUS versus NCE (28.9 mL/m 2 ±12.6 versus 28.6 mL/m 2 ±12.2; P =0.61). In multivariable logistic regression models, LAVI was greater in cardioembolic stroke versus NCE (adjusted odds ratio per mL/m 2 , 1.07; 95% CI, 1.05–1.09; P <0.001) but not in ESUS versus NCE (adjusted odds ratio per mL/m 2 , 1.00; 95% CI, 0.99–1.02; P =0.720). Among 99 patients with ESUS who underwent cardiac monitoring, 18.2% had AF detected; LAVI was independently associated with AF detection in ESUS (adjusted odds ratio per mL/m 2 , 1.09; 95% CI, 1.02–1.15; P =0.007). Conclusions— LAVI is associated with cardioembolic stroke as well as AF detection in patients with ESUS, 2 subsets of ischemic stroke that benefit from anticoagulation therapy. Patients with increased LAVI may be a subgroup where anticoagulation may be tested for stroke prevention.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations152
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207