Recent developments in pre-hospital and in-hospital triage for endovascular stroke treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Triage describes the assignment of resources based on where they can be best used, are most needed, or are most likely to achieve success. Triage is of particular importance in time-critical conditions such as acute ischemic stroke. In this setting, one of the goals of triage is to minimize the delay to endovascular thrombectomy (EVT), without delaying intravenous thrombolysis or other time-critical treatments including patients who cannot benefit from EVT. EVT triage is highly context-specific, and depends on availability of financial resources, staff resources, local infrastructure, and geography. Furthermore, the EVT triage landscape is constantly changing, as EVT indications evolve and new neuroimaging methods, EVT technologies, and adjunctive medical treatments are developed and refined. This review provides an overview of recent developments in EVT triage at both the pre-hospital and in-hospital stages. We discuss pre-hospital large vessel occlusion detection tools, transport paradigms, in-hospital workflows, acute stroke neuroimaging protocols, and angiography suite workflows. The most important factor in EVT triage, however, is teamwork. Irrespective of any new technology, EVT triage will only reach optimal performance if all team members, including paramedics, nurses, technologists, emergency physicians, neurologists, radiologists, neurosurgeons, and anesthesiologists, are involved and engaged. Thus, building sustainable relationships through continuous efforts and hands-on training forms an integral part in ensuring rapid and efficient EVT triage.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".