MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4283393031 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2022.101

B.6 Endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke in patients with pre-morbid disability: a meta-analysis

2022· article· en· W4283393031 on OpenAlexaffvenue
F Bala, B Beland, E Mistry, M Almekhlafi, M Goyal, A Ganesh

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsCalgary Laboratory Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineModified Rankin ScaleMeta-analysisStroke (engine)Randomized controlled trialOdds ratioInternal medicineIschemic stroke

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Trials of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) for acute stroke have excluded patients with pre-morbid disability. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness and safety of EVT in patients with pre-morbid disability. Methods: According to PRISMA guidelines, we searched for studies describing outcomes in patients with pre-morbid disability (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 2-5), treated with EVT or medical management (MM). Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool outcomes including return to baseline mRS at 90 days, symptomatic ICH (sICH), and 90-day mortality. Results: We analyzed 14 studies of patients with pre-morbid disability (mRS2-5: EVT=1,373, MM=253). Compared to medical therapy, EVT was associated with higher likelihood of return to baseline mRS (OR=2.37, 95%CI:1.39-4.04) and a trend towards lower mortality (OR=0.68, 95%CI:0.46-1.02), with similar odds of sICH (OR 1.01, 95%CI:0.49-2.08). In studies comparing patients with vs. without pre-morbid disability treated with EVT, similar results were found except that pre-morbid disability, when defined more strictly as mRS 3-5, was associated with mortality (OR 3.49, p<0.001). Conclusions: In patients with pre-morbid disability, EVT carries a higher chance of return to baseline mRS compared to patients treated with MM or without pre-morbid disability, although with higher mortality than patients without pre-morbid disability. These findings merit validation with randomized controlled trials.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.073
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management→French-language works237,207→