MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3156124860 · doi:10.1177/17474930211013285

Comparison of mothership versus drip-and-ship models in treating patients with acute ischemic stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2021· review· en· W3156124860 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Mohamed, Nida Fatima, Ashfaq Shuaib, Maher Saqqur

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Stroke · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaTrillium Health CentreMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThrombolysisConfidence intervalOdds ratioStroke (engine)Internal medicineSingle CenterModified Rankin ScaleMeta-analysisSurgeryIschemic strokeIschemiaMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: There is controversy if direct to comprehensive center "mothership" or stopping at primary center for thrombolysis before transfer to comprehensive center "drip-and-ship" are best models of treatment of acute stroke. In this study, we compare mothership and drip-and-ship models to evaluate the best option of functional outcome. METHODS: Studies between 1990 and 2020 were extracted from online electronic databases. Clinical outcomes, critical time measurements, functional independence, and mortality were then compared. RESULTS: A total of 7824 patients' data were retrieved from 13 publications (3 randomized control trials and 10 retrospective ones). In addition, 4639 (59.3%) patients were treated under mothership model, and 3185 (40.7%) followed the drip-and-ship model with mean age of 70.01 ± 3.58 versus 69.03 ± 3.36; p < 0.001, respectively. The National Institute Health Stroke Scale was 15.57 ± 3.83 for the mothership and 15.72 ± 2.99 for the drip-and-ship model (p ≤ 0.001). The mean symptoms onset-to-puncture time was significantly shorter in the mothership group compared to the drip-and-ship (159.69 min vs. 223.89 min; p ≤ 0.001, respectively). Moreover, the collected data indicated no significant difference between symptom's onset to intravenous thrombolysis time and stroke onset-to-successful recanalization time (p = 0.205 and p ≤ 0.001, respectively). Patients had significantly worse functional outcome (modified Rankin score) (3-6) at 90 days in the drip-and-ship model (odds ratio (OR): 1.47, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.13-1.92, p < 0.004) and 1.49-folds higher likelihood of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (OR: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.22-1.81, p < 0.0001) compared to mothership. However, there were no statistically significant difference in terms of mortality (OR: 1.16, 95% CI: 0.87-1.55, p = 0.32) and successful recanalization (OR: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.76-1.65, p = 0.56) between the two models of care. CONCLUSION: Patients in the mothership model have significantly improved functional independence and recovery. Further studies are needed as the data from prospectively randomized studies are not of sufficient quality to make definite recommendations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations43
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of StrokeSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207