MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183663518 · doi:10.1177/0271678x211033732

Integrative physiological assessment of cerebral hemodynamics and metabolism in acute ischemic stroke

2021· article· en· W3183663518 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCerebral autoregulationCerebral perfusion pressureCerebral blood flowAutoregulationPerfusionStroke (engine)Blood pressureHemodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Restoring perfusion to ischemic tissue is the primary goal of acute ischemic stroke care, yet only a small portion of patients receive reperfusion treatment. Since blood pressure (BP) is an important determinant of cerebral perfusion, effective BP management could facilitate reperfusion. But how BP should be managed in very early phase of ischemic stroke remains a contentious issue, due to the lack of clear evidence. Given the complex relationship between BP and cerebral blood flow (CBF)—termed cerebral autoregulation (CA)—bedside monitoring of cerebral perfusion and oxygenation could help guide BP management, thereby improve stroke patient outcome. The aim of INFOMATAS is to ‘ identify novel therapeutic targets for treatment and management in acute ischemic stroke’. In this review, we identify novel physiological parameters which could be used to guide BP management in acute stroke, and explore methodologies for monitoring them at the bedside. We outline the challenges in translating these potential prognostic markers into clinical use.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.266 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations65
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cerebral Blood Flow & MetabolismSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207