Variability Predictors of Vasospasm in Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Feasibility Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mean cerebral blood flow velocity (mean-CBFV) obtained from Transcranial Doppler (TCD) poorly predicts cerebral vasospasm in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). Variability descriptors of mean-CBFV obtained during extended TCD recordings may improve this prediction. We assessed the feasibility of generating reliable linear and non-linear descriptors of mean-CBFV variability using extended recordings in aSAH patients and in healthy controls. We also explored which of those metrics might have the ability to discriminate between aSAH patients and healthy controls, and among patients who would go on to develop vasospasm and those who would not. METHODS: Bilateral mean-CBFV, blood pressure, and heart rate were continuously recorded for 40 minutes in aSAH patients (n = 8) within the first 5 days after ictus, in age-matched healthy controls (n = 8) and in additional young controls (n = 8). We obtained linear [standard deviation, coefficient of variations, and the very-low (0.003-0.040 Hz), low (0.040-0.150 Hz), and high-frequency (0.15-0.4 Hz) power spectra] and non-linear (Fractality, deterministic Chaos analyses) variability metrics. RESULTS: We successfully obtained TCD recordings from patients and healthy controls and calculated the desired metrics of mean-CBFV variability. Differences were appreciable between aSAH patients and healthy controls, as well as between aSAH patients who later developed vasospasm and those who did not. CONCLUSIONS: A 40-minute TCD recording provides reliable variability metrics in aSAH patients and healthy controls. Future studies are required to determine if mean-CBFV variability metrics remain stable over time, and whether they may serve to identify patients who are at greatest risk of developing cerebral vasospasm after aSAH.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".