MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3210912948 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2021.728012

Time-Based Decision Making for Reperfusion in Acute Ischemic Stroke

2021· review· en· W3210912948 on OpenAlexaff
Mathias Grøan, Johanna M. Ospel, Soffien Chadli Ajmi, Else Charlotte Sandset, Martin Kurz, Mona Skjelland, Rajiv Advani

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversitetet i Oslo
KeywordsModalitiesMedicineAcute strokeModality (human–computer interaction)Clinical decision makingProcess (computing)Stroke (engine)Intensive care medicineFlow chartComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decision making in the extended time windows for acute ischemic stroke can be a complex and time-consuming process. The process of making the clinical decision to treat has been compounded by the availability of different imaging modalities. In the setting of acute ischemic stroke, time is of the essence and chances of a good outcome diminish by each passing minute. Navigating the plethora of advanced imaging modalities means that treatment in some cases can be inefficaciously delayed. Time delays and individually based non-programmed decision making can prove challenging for clinicians. Visual aids can assist such decision making aimed at simplifying the use of advanced imaging. Flow charts are one such visual tool that can expedite treatment in this setting. A systematic review of existing literature around imaging modalities based on site of occlusion and time from onset can be used to aid decision making; a more program-based thought process. The use of an acute reperfusion flow chart helping navigate the myriad of imaging modalities can aid the effective treatment of patients.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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