Normal-Appearing White Matter Integrity Is a Predictor of Outcome After Ischemic Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Purpose— The aim of the present study was to evaluate the relationship between normal-appearing white matter (NAWM) integrity and postischemic stroke recovery in 4 main domains including cognition, mood, gait, and dependency. Methods— A prospective study was conducted, including patients diagnosed for an ischemic supratentorial stroke on a 3T brain MRI performed 24 to 72 hours after symptom onset. Clinical assessment 1 year after stroke included a Montreal Cognitive Assessment, an Isaacs set test, a Zazzo cancelation task, a Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale, a 10-meter walking test, and a modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Diffusion tensor imaging parameters in the NAWM were computed using FMRIB (Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain) Diffusion Toolbox. The relationships between mean NAWM diffusion tensor imaging parameters and the clinical scores were assessed using linear and ordinal regression analyses, including the volumes of white matter hyperintensities, gray matter, and ischemic stroke as radiological covariates. Results— Two hundred seven subjects were included (66±13 years old; 67% men; median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, 3; interquartile range, 2–6). In the models including only radiological variables, NAWM fractional anisotropy was associated with the mRS and the cognitive scores. After adjusting for demographic confounders, NAWM fractional anisotropy remained a significant predictor of mRS (β=−0.24; P =0.04). Additional path analysis showed that NAWM fractional anisotropy had a direct effect on mRS (β=−0.241; P =0.001) and a less important indirect effect mediating white matter hyperintensity burden. Similar results were found with mean diffusivity, axial diffusivity, and radial diffusivity. In further subgroup analyses, a relationship between NAWM integrity in widespread white matter tracts, mRS, and Isaacs set test was found in right hemispheric strokes. Conclusions— NAWM diffusion tensor imaging parameters measured early after an ischemic stroke are independent predictors of functional outcome and may be additional markers to include in studies evaluating poststroke recovery.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".