MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111474173 · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2020.601471

Effects of Early Changes in Blood Pressure During Intravenous Thrombolysis on the Prognosis of Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients

2020· article· en· W3111474173 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zhongxiu Wang, Chao Wang, Peng Zhang, Yang Qu, Zhen‐Ni Guo, Yi Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Aging Neuroscience · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersProgram for Jilin University Science and Technology Innovative Research TeamJilin University
KeywordsMedicineThrombolysisModified Rankin ScaleBlood pressureStroke (engine)Internal medicineTissue plasminogen activatorUnivariate analysisMultivariate analysisCardiologyIschemic strokeSurgeryIschemiaMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) therapy is currently one of the best medical treatments available for patients with acute ischemic stroke. Studies have shown that blood pressure (BP) changes in patients treated with IVT are significantly correlated with prognosis. Objective: Our study aimed to determine the relationship between BP changes during recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA) infusion and the 3-month prognosis evaluated using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and determine the factors influencing BP changes during rt-PA infusion. Methods: Consecutive patients who were treated with IVT and admitted to our stroke center between May 2015 and October 2017 were analyzed retrospectively. Patients were divided into two groups according to their 3-month prognosis status: patients with mRS ≤ 2 were defined as “favorable outcome group” and those with mRS ≥ 3 as “unfavorable outcome group”. First, the factors affecting prognosis after thrombolysis were analyzed. Second, we analyzed the relationship between BP and the prognosis. BP was taken before and at regular intervals of 15 min during the rt-PA infusion (1 h). The average value of BP during thrombolysis was calculated and compared to the baseline BP. BP decrease was defined as the difference between the baseline BP and the average BP, provided it was greater than 0 mmHg. Third, univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify factors that may contribute to BP decrease. Results: In total, 458 patients were included. Patients with a lower baseline National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score (8.25 ± 5.57 vs. 13.51 ± 7.42, P < 0.001), a higher Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS; 8.65 ± 1.82 vs. 8.13 ± 2.00, P = 0.005), decreased BP during thrombolysis (69.4% vs. 59.8%, P = 0.037), and steady BP (SD < 10 mmHg) were more likely to have a favorable outcome (73.9% vs. 60.6%, P = 0.019). High baseline BP (OR > 1), hypertension history (OR < 1), and baseline ASPECTS (OR > 1) were independent factors of BP change during thrombolysis. Conclusion: Patients with decreased or steady BP during thrombolysis were more likely to have a favorable outcome. Baseline ASPECTS, baseline NIHSS score, and hypertension history influenced BP changes during thrombolysis.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Aging NeuroscienceSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207