MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2953459738 · doi:10.1161/str.48.suppl_1.108

Abstract 108: Additional Value of Intracranial Vessel Wall Imaging to Determine the Etiology of Ischemic Stroke

2017· article· en· W2953459738 on OpenAlexaff
Joanna D. Schaafsma, David J. Mikulis, Jonathan M. Coutinho, Cheryl Jaigobin, Daniel M. Mandell

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsToronto Western Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEtiologyStroke (engine)Differential diagnosisWork-upMagnetic resonance imagingRadiologyVasculitisInternal medicineNeuroimagingCardiologyPathologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: High-resolution MR-imaging of the intracranial arterial wall is a promising technique for diagnosis of intracranial arteriopathies in patients with ischemic stroke. We aimed to evaluate the additional value of vessel wall imaging (VWI) to the standard work-up of ischemic stroke patients. Methods: We selected all patients with ischemic stroke who had intracranial VWI at our institute to evaluate possible intracranial arteriopathy, such as atherosclerosis, dissection, vasculitis, or reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome. Two observers, who were blinded to the VWI, first determined the most likely stroke etiology based on the standard work-up (clinical history, brain parenchyma imaging, vessel lumen imaging, laboratory results, and cardiac work-up). Then VWI was reviewed to assess whether this would change the suspected stroke etiology or whether the differential diagnosis could be narrowed down. Results: Between 2006 and 2014, 199 patients with ischemic stroke, mean age 55 (IQ-range: 44-67) had VWI. VWI provided additional information to the standard stroke work-up in 128 patients (64%). In 38/199 patients (19%) the conclusion on stroke etiology was altered based on VWI and in 90/199 patients (45%) the differential diagnosis was further narrowed after VWI. VWI did not have additional value when the most likely stroke etiology based on the standard work-up remained the same (50/199 patients; 25%), when the differential diagnosis could not be narrowed down (16/199; 8%), or in case of poor image quality (5/199 patients; 3%). Patients under the age of 46 benefited more often from VWI than older adults (Odds Ratio 3.5; 95%CI: 1.7-7.6). Conclusion: VWI provided additional information to the conventional stroke work-up in almost two-thirds of patients suspected to have intracranial arteriopathy. Next step is to determine how frequently this additional information resulted in altered therapy.

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)0.006
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.250 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases→French-language works237,207→