Hemorrhagic Transformation in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Quantitative Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prevalence and risk factors of hemorrhagic transformation (HT) after acute ischemic stroke HT have not been adequately delineated. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify English-language prospective observational MEDLINE and EMBASE-listed reports of acute ischemic stroke with HT published from 1985-2017. Studies that used the ECASS-2 definitions of hemorrhagic transformation subtypes, hemorrhagic infarction (HI), and parenchymal hematoma (PH) were included. Patients treated with intravenous thrombolysis with tissue plasminogen activator (IV-tPA) were compared with those who did not receive thrombolysis. A total of 65 studies with 17,259 patients met inclusion criteria. Overall, HT prevalence was 27%; 32% in patients receiving IV-tPA vs. 20% in those without. Overall PH prevalence was 9%; 12% in IV-tPA treated patients vs. 5% in those without. HT was associated with a history of atrial fibrillation (OR 2.94) and use of anticoagulants (OR 2.47). HT patients had higher NIHSS (Hedge's-G 0.96) and larger infarct volume (diffusion-weighted MRI, Hedge's-G 0.8). In IV-tPA treated patients, PH correlated with antiplatelet (OR 3) and statin treatment (OR 4). HT (OR 3) and PH (OR 8) were associated with a poor outcome at 90-day (mRS 5-6). Hemorrhagic transformation is a frequent complication of acute ischemic stroke and is associated with poor outcome. Recognition of risk factors for HT and PH may reduce their incidence and severity.
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 | 0.015 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.016 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".