Abstract TP9: ASPECTS Values in Patients With Large Vessel Occlusion and Time of Arrival to Emergency Department: Estimation of Eligibility for Endovascular Stroke Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Favorable imaging profile according to The Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) is an important selection criterion for endovascular therapy in patients with acute stroke from anterior circulation large vessel occlusion (LVO). The goal of this study was analyze the relationship between ASPECTS values and time of arrival to emergency department (ED) after stroke onset, and its impact on patient’s eligibility for endovascular stroke therapy. Methods: analysts of ASPECTS values in consecutive patients with acute stroke from anterior circulation LVO admitted within 24 hours of onset was performed. Criteria from American Heart Association/American Stroke Association (AHA/ASA) guidelines based on the proposed class I-II recommendations, including the ‘favorable’ ASPECTS range of 6-10 were applied to determine frequency of potentially eligible patients for endovascular stroke therapy. Results: Of 641 patients with acute ischemic stroke presenting within the first 24 hours of onset, 71 (11%) had anterior circulation LVO. Medium time from arrival to ED to noncontrast head CT was 6 minutes. 72% of patients arrived to ED within the first 6 hours, 18% within 6-12 hours, and 10% within 12-24 hours of symptom onset. Based on ‘favorable’ ASPECTS criterion alone, 80% of patients with anterior circulation LVO who arrive to the ED within the first 6 hours of stroke onset would qualify for endovascular therapy. Of those who arrived to ED within 6-24 hours of stroke onset, 50% had ‘favorable’ ASPECTS. Conclusions: 50% of patients with stroke from anterior circulation LVO who arrive to ED within 6-24 hours of onset have ‘favorable’ ASPECTS, making them potentially eligible for endovascular stroke therapy.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; 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".