Observer Agreement on Computed Tomography Perfusion Imaging in Acute Ischemic Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Purpose- Computed tomography (CT) perfusion (CTP) provides potentially valuable information to guide treatment decisions in acute stroke. Assessment of interobserver reliability of CTP has, however, been limited to small, mostly single center studies. We performed a large, internet-based study to assess observer reliability of CTP interpretation in acute stroke. Methods- We selected 24 cases from the IST-3 (Third International Stroke Trial), ATTEST (Alteplase Versus Tenecteplase for Thrombolysis After Ischaemic Stroke), and POSH (Post Stroke Hyperglycaemia) studies to illustrate various perfusion abnormalities. For each case, observers were presented with noncontrast CT, maps of cerebral blood volume, cerebral blood flow, mean transit time, delay time, and thresholded penumbra maps (dichotomized into penumbra and core), together with a short clinical vignette. Observers used a structured questionnaire to record presence of perfusion deficit, its extent compared with ischemic changes on noncontrast CT, and an Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score for noncontrast CT and CTP. All images were viewed, and responses were collected online. We assessed observer agreement with Krippendorff-α. Intraobserver agreement was assessed by inviting observers who reviewed all scans for a repeat review of 6 scans. Results- Fifty seven observers contributed to the study, with 27 observers reviewing all 24 scans and 17 observers contributing repeat readings. Interobserver agreement was good to excellent for all CTP. Agreement was higher for perfusion maps compared with noncontrast CT and was higher for mean transit time, delay time, and penumbra map (Krippendorff-α =0.77, 0.79, and 0.81, respectively) compared with cerebral blood volume and cerebral blood flow (Krippendorff-α =0.69 and 0.62, respectively). Intraobserver agreement was fair to substantial in the majority of readers (Krippendorff-α ranged from 0.29 to 0.80). Conclusions- There are high levels of interobserver and intraobserver agreement for the interpretation of CTP in acute stroke, particularly of mean transit time, delay time, and penumbra maps.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.030 | 0.087 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".