Seizures after Ischemic Stroke: A Matched Multicenter Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to identify risk factors for acute symptomatic seizures and post-stroke epilepsy after acute ischemic stroke and evaluate the effects of reperfusion treatment. METHODS: We assessed the risk factors for post-stroke seizures using logistic or Cox regression in a multicenter study, including adults from 8 European referral centers with neuroimaging-confirmed ischemic stroke. We compared the risk of post-stroke seizures between participants with or without reperfusion treatment following propensity score matching to reduce confounding due to treatment selection. RESULTS: In the overall cohort of 4,229 participants (mean age 71 years, 57% men), a higher risk of acute symptomatic seizures was observed in those with more severe strokes, infarcts located in the posterior cerebral artery territory, and strokes caused by large-artery atherosclerosis. Strokes caused by small-vessel occlusion carried a small risk of acute symptomatic seizures. 6% developed post-stroke epilepsy. Risk factors for post-stroke epilepsy were acute symptomatic seizures, more severe strokes, infarcts involving the cerebral cortex, and strokes caused by large-artery atherosclerosis. Electroencephalography findings within 7 days of stroke onset were not independently associated with the risk of post-stroke epilepsy. There was no association between reperfusion treatments in general or only intravenous thrombolysis or mechanical thrombectomy with the time to post-stroke epilepsy or the risk of acute symptomatic seizures. INTERPRETATION: Post-stroke seizures are related to stroke severity, etiology, and location, whereas an early electroencephalogram was not predictive of epilepsy. We did not find an association of reperfusion treatment with risks of acute symptomatic seizures or post-stroke epilepsy. ANN NEUROL 2021;90:808-820.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".