What is new in the management of the acute ischaemic stroke?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stroke is a ma jor challenge for medicine in the 21st century. Despite modern diagnostics and even revolutionary methods of treatment, stroke is still the main cause of permanent disability and the second cause of death worldwide. Recent clinical trials have led to a breakthrough in the treatment of stroke. On their basis, many scientific societies updated the guidelines for the management of stroke. We present the most important changes in prehospital care, emergency evaluation, in-hospital non-specific treatment and specific treatment with intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular therapies. The paper is based on the recent recommendations of American Heart Association/American Stroke Association; Canadian Stroke Consortium and the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians; European Stroke Organisation and Polish Neurological Society. Problems related to the pre- and in-hospital management of patients with acute ischaemic stroke, with a particular emphasis on the dilemma on whether to bypass a primary stroke centre to transport the patient to a comprehensive stroke centre offering endovascular thrombectomy, and the problem of reducing door-to-needle time for intravenous thrombolysis are discussed. The recommendations for the treatment of arterial hypertension and hyperglycaemia in acute ischaemic stroke and the problem of extended time window for intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular thrombectomy are also discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".