MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3048083223 · doi:10.1161/str.51.suppl_1.wmp46

Abstract WMP46: Frequency of High-Risk Features and Stroke Risk in Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020· article· en· W3048083223 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Kamtchum‐Tatuene, Alan H. Wilman, Maher Saqqur, Gina Sykes, Ashfaq Shuaib, Glen C. Jickling

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAsymptomaticStroke (engine)Internal medicineCardiologyIncidence (geometry)Fibrous capRisk factorMeta-analysisSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The recommended treatment of asymptomatic carotid atherosclerosis is best medical therapy since the 1% annual risk of stroke is lower than the risk of stroke from revascularization. Specific imaging features may identify patients at increased risk of stroke and optimize the risk-benefit ratio of carotid surgery. To assess the relevance and feasibility of such approach, we aimed to summarize available data on the frequency of high-risk features and the related risk of stroke in patients with asymptomatic carotid atherosclerosis. Methods: A search of Pubmed and Ovid-Embase identified prospective studies reporting findings of carotid plaque imaging and incidence of stroke in patients with asymptomatic carotid atherosclerosis. Prevalence of high-risk features and incidence of ipsilateral ischemic events were pooled using random-effect meta-analysis. Results: Thirty-five studies enrolling 5808 participants with asymptomatic carotid atherosclerosis of various grades were included. The pooled prevalence (95% CI) of high-risk features on plaque imaging was 28.8 (18.8 - 38.7). The prevalence of neovascularization was 53.5% (45.2 - 61.8), echolucency 40.0% (30.8 - 49.6), lipid-rich necrotic core 35.7% (24.1 - 48.1), thin or ruptured fibrous cap 27.5% (14.2 - 43.3), silent brain infarcts 27.0% (15.3 - 40.5), impaired cerebrovascular reserve 25.9% (10.3 - 45.5), intraplaque hemorrhage 19.2% (13.9 - 25.1), microembolic signals 14.4% (8.9 - 20.8), and ulceration 13.5% (1.3 - 34.0). In 15 cohort studies enrolling 4215 participants, the mean duration of follow-up was 3.5 years (2.0 - 4.6). The pooled incidence of ipsilateral ischemic events was 2.7 per 100 person-years (1.6 - 4.0). This incidence was higher in patients with a high-risk feature (4.9%, 2.3 - 8.2) than in those without (0.9%, 0.2 - 1.8) with an odds ratio of 4.6 (2.3 - 9.3). Conclusion: High-risk features on imaging are frequent in asymptomatic carotid atherosclerosis and associated with a fourfold increase in the annual risk of ipsilateral ischemic events. A risk-oriented selection of patients with asymptomatic carotid atherosclerosis prior to randomization in revascularization trials appears relevant and may be a strategy to prevent stroke in asymptomatic carotid atherosclerosis.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.034
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases→French-language works237,207→