MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4360609623 · doi:10.7861/clinmed.2022-0554

Perfusion imaging in acute ischaemic stroke – the beginning of the end?

2023· article· en· W4360609623 on OpenAlexaff
Permesh Singh Dhillon, Phil White, Mayank Goyal, Wim H. van Zwam, Robert Lenthall

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeuroimagingStroke (engine)Perfusion scanningOcclusionAngiographyPopulationAcute strokeIschaemic strokeRadiologyPerfusionIntensive care medicineIschemiaCardiologyEmergency department

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) for large vessel occlusion in acute ischaemic stroke is the standard of care when initiated within 6 hours of stroke onset, and is performed between 6-24 hours using advanced neuroimaging (CT perfusion or MR imaging) for patients who meet the strict imaging selection criteria. However, adherence to the restrictive imaging criteria recommended by current guidelines is impeded in many parts of the world, including the UK, by resource constraints and limited access to advanced neuroimaging in the emergency setting. Furthermore, recent randomised and non-randomised studies have demonstrated that patients selected without advanced neuroimaging (with non-contrast CT and CT angiography only) using less restrictive imaging criteria for EVT eligibility beyond 6 hours from onset still benefited from EVT treatment, thereby increasing the proportion of patients eligible for EVT and widening the potential treatment impact at a population level. Hence, current guidelines should be updated expeditiously to reflect the level I evidence in support of more liberal imaging selection criteria for patients presenting with acute ischaemic stroke due to a large vessel occlusion.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.339 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical MedicineSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207