Progression of stroke deficits in patients presenting with mild symptoms: The underlying etiology determines outcome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Patients with acute stroke and mild or rapidly improving symptoms frequently show progression. The role of reperfusion treatment in such patients is not clear. We hypothesized that progression was most likely in patients with cortical localization and such patients may benefit from thrombolysis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We interrogated Hamad Stroke Database to evaluate 90-days outcome in patients with acute ischemic stroke admitted within 4 hours and a NIHSS score of ≤6. Evaluation was based on localization (lacunar or cortical), multi-model imaging abnormalities and whether they received rt-PA. The 90-day mRS was used to determine outcome. RESULTS: During study period 6381 patients were admitted with acute stroke. Mild stroke within 4 hours was diagnosed in 506 [no thrombolysis: 381(lacunar: 213; cortical: 168), thrombolysis: 125 (lacunar: 45; cortical: 80)]. The rt-PA treated patients had significantly higher NIHSS (2.94±3.9 versus 1.28±2.46, p<0.0001), increased rates of complications (16.0% versus 3.9%, p<0.0001) and longer hospital stay (6.05±8.1 versus 3.78±3.6 days; p<0.001). In patients with cortical stroke, intracranial arterial occlusions (11.6% vs 3.9%, p<0.0001) and CTP mismatch (22.2% vs 4.4%, p<0.0001) were more frequent in rt-PA treated patients. Discharge mRS (33.6% versus 13.9%, p<0.001) and 90-days mRS (23.2% versus 11.8%, p = 0.002) was significantly worse in patients with cortical stroke (rt-PA-treated and untreated patients). CONCLUSIONS: The outcome in patients with mild stroke depends on lesion location (lacunar versus cortical) and severity of symptoms. Patients who receive rt-PA have significantly larger deficits, increased imaging abnormalities and higher rates of hospital complication, explaining the poor outcome in such subjects.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".