Outcome prediction in large vessel occlusion ischemic stroke with or without endovascular stroke treatment: THRIVE-EVT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The THRIVE score and the THRIVE-c calculation are validated ischemic stroke outcome prediction tools based on patient variables that are readily available at initial presentation. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated the benefit of endovascular treatment (EVT) for many patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO), and pooled data from these trials allow for adaptation of the THRIVE-c calculation for use in shared clinical decision making regarding EVT. METHODS: To extend THRIVE-c for use in the context of EVT, we extracted data from the Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive (VISTA) from 7 RCTs of EVT. Models were built in a randomly selected development cohort using logistic regression that included the predictors from THRIVE-c: age, NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score, presence of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and/or atrial fibrillation, as well as randomization to EVT and, where available, the Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS). RESULTS: Good outcome was achieved in 366/787 (46.5%) of subjects randomized to EVT and in 236/795 (29.7%) of subjects randomized to control (P < 0.001), and the improvement in outcome with EVT was seen across age, NIHSS, and THRIVE-c good outcome prediction. Models to predict outcome using THRIVE elements (age, NIHSS, and comorbidities) together with EVT, with or without ASPECTS, had similar performance by ROC analysis in the development and validation cohorts (THRIVE-EVT ROC area under the curve (AUC) = 0.716 in development, 0.727 in validation, P = 0.30; THRIVE-EVT + ASPECTS ROC AUC = 0.718 in development, 0.735 in validation, P = 0.12). CONCLUSION: THRIVE-EVT may be used alongside the original THRIVE-c calculation to improve outcome probability estimation for patients with acute ischemic stroke, including patients with or without LVO, and to model the potential improvement in outcomes with EVT for an individual patient based on variables that are available at initial presentation. Online calculators for THRIVE-c estimation are available at www.thrivescore.org and www.mdcalc.com/thrive-score-for-stroke-outcome.
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 | 0.017 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".