MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Stroke units in Nigeria: a report from a Nationwide organizational cross-sectional survey

2022· article· en· W4285246261 on OpenAlexaff
Babawale Arabambi, Olajumoke Oshinaike, Shamsideen Abayomi Ogun, Chukwuemeka O Eze, Abiodun Bello, Steven Igetei, Yakub Yusuf, Rashidat Amoke Olanigan, Sikirat Yetunde Ashiru

Bibliographic record

VenuePan African Medical Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)Cross-sectional studyUnit (ring theory)Emergency medicineFamily medicineMedical emergencyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: stroke is one of the leading causes of death and disability in Nigeria. Stroke unit care is crucial for reducing mortality and morbidity in stroke. This study describes the stroke units' structure, organization, and care process in Nigerian tertiary hospitals. Methods: this study is a cross-sectional descriptive organizational survey-based study using an online structured questionnaire to collect information on the stroke units. Results: five (8.6%) out of 58 hospitals had a stroke unit. The number of beds ranged between 10 and 27 with the coverage of hospital stroke patients ranging from 24% to 100%. All the centers had a multidisciplinary team for their unit. The basic required investigations like computerized tomography and electrocardiography were available in the centers. Thrombolytic therapy coverage was suboptimal in all the centers due to prolonged onset-to-arrival times and inaccessibility of thrombolytic medications. Conclusion: there has been some progress in stroke unit availability since the country´s first stroke unit was established over a decade ago. However, there is still the need to create more stroke units in Nigeria and improve reperfusion therapy coverage.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePan African Medical JournalSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207