MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4378837725 · doi:10.1101/2023.05.29.23290701

Stroke Hospitalization Administration & Monitoring: Routine Or Covid-19 Care (SHAMROCC)

2023· preprint· en· W4378837725 on OpenAlexaff
Timothé Langlois‐Thérien, Michel Shamy, Brian Dewar, Tim Ramsay, Ronda Lun, Dylan Blacquière, Robert Fahed, Dar Dowlatshahi, Grant Stotts, Célina Ducroux

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThrombolysisStroke (engine)ComplicationEmergency medicineIntensive care unitCohortRetrospective cohort studyMyocardial infarctionIncidence (geometry)DemographicsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Intracerebral hemorrhageIntensive care medicineSurgeryInternal medicineSubarachnoid hemorrhageDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND Monitoring stroke patients in critical-care units for 24 hours after thrombolysis or endovascular thrombectomy is considered standard of care but is not evidence-based. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, our center modified its protocol in April 2021 with 24-hour critical-care monitoring no longer being guaranteed for stroke patients. We aim to compare the incidence and timing of complications over the first 24 hours post-reperfusion therapies and their association to hospital unit in 2019, 2020 and 2021. METHODS We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study. We analyzed data from stroke patients treated with thrombolysis and/or endovascular thrombectomy at our center in 2019 (pre-Covid-19, standard of care), 2020 (during Covid-19, standard of care) and 2021 (during Covid-19, new protocol). Data extracted included demographics, the nature and timing of complications within the first 24 hours, and the unit at the time of any complication. Major complications included neurologic deterioration, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, recurrent stroke, myocardial infarction, systemic bleeding, rapid assessment of critical events call, and death. RESULTS Three hundred forty-nine patients were included in our study: 78 patients in 2019, 115 patients in 2020, and 156 patients in 2021. In 2021, 32% of patients experienced at least one complication within the first 24 hours compared to 34% in 2020 and 27% in 2019. In 2021, 33% of patients admitted to critical-care units had a complication compared to 31% in 2020 and 26% in 2019. In 2021, 70% of complications had occurred by hour eight compared to 49% in 2020 and 29% in 2019. Patients with low NIHSS score at presentation and treated only with tPA had significantly less complications. CONCLUSIONS Despite the change of protocol in April 2021, the incidence and timing of complications did not significantly worsen compared to prior years and were not associated with hospital location. Further research is required to evaluate the necessity of critical care monitoring for 24 hours in this population, specifically patients with low NIHSS score at presentation and treated only with tPA.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management→French-language works237,207→