MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297809476 · doi:10.5772/intechopen.106389

Diagnosis and Management of Acute Ischemic Stroke

2022· book-chapter· en· W4297809476 on OpenAlexaff
A. Zohaib Siddiqi, Angela Young, Ankur Wadhwa

Bibliographic record

VenueIntechOpen eBooks · 2022
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPenumbraTenecteplaseMedicineThrombolysisTissue plasminogen activatorRadiologyAcute strokeAngiographyStroke (engine)Computed tomography angiographyIschemiaInternal medicineMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter will review updates in the various imaging modalities used to diagnose acute ischemic stroke (AIS), how these are used to select patients for intervention, and the different interventions used for management of AIS. The backbone of the AIS diagnostic algorithm remains the computed tomography scan (CT) given its speed of use and sensitivity. CT-angiography (CTA) is crucial in diagnosing large-vessel occlusions (LVOs) and multiphase CTA and CT-perfusion (CTP) can demonstrate the number of collaterals in the area and remaining salvageable tissue. MRI can be used to select patients presenting in an unknown time window for thrombolysis. The primary goal of AIS management is to rescue the ischemic penumbra and the approach to treating AIS has gone from a time-based to tissue-based approach. While tPA is still the agent of choice for thrombolysis in patients with AIS, tenecteplase (TNK) may be just as effective and more efficient to use. Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) has shown considerable efficacy for alleviating LVOs and using CTP, patients can be selected for hours after symptom-onset if viable tissue remains. It remains unclear if an “EVT-alone” strategy is superior to “tPA + EVT” strategy but this may be dependent on clot, patient, and geographical characteristics.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.017

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntechOpen eBooksSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207