MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013901865 · doi:10.1136/jnnp-2019-322625

Clinical prognosis of FLAIR hyperintense arteries in ischaemic stroke patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020· review· en· W3013901865 on OpenAlexaff
Zien Zhou, Alejandra Malavera, Sohei Yoshimura, Candice Delcourt, Grant Mair, Rustam Al‐Shahi Salman, Andrew M. Demchuk, Joanna M. Wardlaw, Richard I. Lindley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersBritish Heart Foundation
KeywordsFluid-attenuated inversion recoveryMedicineModified Rankin ScaleStroke (engine)ThrombolysisMagnetic resonance imagingRadiologyMeta-analysisMiddle cerebral arteryInternal medicineIschemic strokeIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the association of fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) hyperintense arteries (FLAIR-HAs) on brain MRI and prognosis after acute ischaemic stroke (AIS). METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies reporting clinical or imaging outcomes with presence of FLAIR-HAs after AIS. Two researchers independently assessed eligibility of retrieved studies and extracted data, including from the Enhanced Control of Hypertension and Thrombolysis Stroke Study (ENCHANTED). Outcomes were unfavourable functional outcome (primary, modified Rankin scale scores 3-6 or 2-6), death, intermediate clinical and imaging outcomes. We performed subgroup analyses by treatment or types of FLAIR-HAs defined by location (at proximal/distal middle cerebral artery (MCA), within/beyond diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) lesion) or extent. RESULTS: We included 36 cohort studies (33 prospectively collected) involving 3577 patients. FLAIR-HAs were not associated with functional outcome overall (pooled risk ratio 0.87, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.06), but were significantly associated with better outcome in those receiving endovascular therapy (0.56, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.75). Contrary to FLAIR-HAs at proximal MCA or within DWI lesions, FLAIR-HAs beyond DWI lesions were associated with better outcome (0.67, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.79). FLAIR-HAs favoured recanalisation (1.21, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.38) with increased risk of intracerebral haemorrhage (2.07, 95% CI 1.37 to 3.13) and early neurological deterioration (1.93, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.85). CONCLUSIONS: FLAIR-HAs were not associated with functional outcome overall but were associated with outcome after endovascular therapy for AIS. FLAIR-HAs were also associated with early recanalisation or haemorrhagic complications, and early neurologic deterioration. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019131168.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0210.034
Bibliometrics0.0070.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurology Neurosurgery & PsychiatrySame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207