Ischemic and Hemorrhagic Stroke Among Critically Ill Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: An International Multicenter Coronavirus Disease 2019 Critical Care Consortium Study*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Stroke has been reported in observational series as a frequent complication of coronavirus disease 2019, but more information is needed regarding stroke prevalence and outcomes. We explored the prevalence and outcomes of acute stroke in an international cohort of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 who required ICU admission. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected database. SETTING: A registry of coronavirus disease 2019 patients admitted to ICUs at over 370 international sites was reviewed for patients diagnosed with acute stroke during their stay. PATIENTS: Patients older than 18 years old with acute coronavirus disease 2019 infection in ICU. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 2,699 patients identified (median age 59 yr; male 65%), 59 (2.2%) experienced acute stroke: 0.7% ischemic, 1.0% hemorrhagic, and 0.5% unspecified type. Systemic anticoagulant use was not associated with any stroke type. The frequency of diabetes, hypertension, and smoking was higher in patients with ischemic stroke than in stroke-free and hemorrhagic stroke patients. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support was more common among patients with hemorrhagic (56%) and ischemic stroke (16%) than in those without stroke (10%). Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients had higher cumulative 90-day probabilities of hemorrhagic (relative risk = 10.5) and ischemic stroke (relative risk = 1.7) versus nonextracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients. Hemorrhagic stroke increased the hazard of death (hazard ratio = 2.74), but ischemic stroke did not-similar to the effects of these stroke types seen in noncoronavirus disease 2019 ICU patients. CONCLUSIONS: In an international registry of ICU patients with coronavirus disease 2019, stroke was infrequent. Hemorrhagic stroke, but not ischemic stroke, was associated with increased mortality. Further, both hemorrhagic stroke and ischemic stroke were associated with traditional vascular risk factors. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use was strongly associated with both stroke and death.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".