MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008817764 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000009136

Pediatric ASPECTS predicts outcomes following acute symptomatic neonatal arterial stroke

2020· article· en· W3008817764 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mark T. Mackay, Nedelina Slavova, Manuela Pastore‐Wapp, Sebastian Grunt, Belinda Stojanovski, Susan Donath, Maja Steinlin

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterquartile rangeMedicineEpilepsyReceiver operating characteristicStroke (engine)Cerebral palsyCardiologyInternal medicinePediatricsPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Objective</h3> To test the hypothesis that the Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score (ASPECTS) is useful in determining outcomes after neonatal arterial ischemic stroke (NAIS), we assessed accuracy of the modified pediatric ASPECTS (pedASPECTS) to predict cerebral palsy (CP), neurologic impairment, and epilepsy. <h3>Methods</h3> Cross-sectional study included newborns with acute NAIS whose outcomes were assessed at ≥18 months after stroke. PedASPECTS accuracy to predict outcomes was determined by sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves, and correlation between pedASPECTS and infarct volume was determined by the Spearman correlation coefficient. <h3>Results</h3> Ninety-six children met the inclusion criteria. Median percentage infarct to supratentorial brain volume was 6.8% (interquartile range [IQR] 3.0%–14.3%). Median pedASPECTS was 7 (IQR 4–10). At a median age of 2.1 years, 35% developed CP, 43% had neurologic impairment, and 7% had epilepsy. Median pedASPECTS predicted outcomes of interest: CP (10, IQR 8–12) vs no CP (5, IQR 4–8) (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.0001), poor (9, IQR 7–12) vs good (6, IQR 4–8) neurologic outcomes (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.0001), and epilepsy (10, IQR 8–12) vs no epilepsy (7, IQR 4–10) (<i>p</i> = 0.033). PedASPECTS accuracy was good for CP (ROC 0.811) and fair for neurologic impairment (ROC 0.760) and epilepsy (ROC 0.761). A pedASPECTS ≥8 had ≥69% sensitivity and ≥54% specificity for clinical outcomes. PedASPECTS correlated with infarct volume (Spearman rank 0.701, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.0001). <h3>Conclusions</h3> This study provides Class II evidence that pedASPECTS has fair to good accuracy for predicting CP, neurologic impairment, and epilepsy after NAIS and correlates with infarct volume. PedASPECTS may assist with early identification of babies requiring close developmental surveillance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.639

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations37
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis MechanismsFrench-language works237,207