Higher Procedural Volumes Are Associated with Faster Treatment Times, Better Functional Outcomes, and Lower Mortality in Patients Undergoing Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to characterize the association of hospital procedural volumes with outcomes among acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients undergoing endovascular therapy (EVT). METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational cohort study using data prospectively collected from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2019 in the Get with the Guidelines-Stroke registry. Participants were derived from a cohort of 60,727 AIS patients treated with EVT within 24 hours at 626 hospitals. The primary cohort excluded patients with pretreatment National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) < 6, onset-to-treatment time > 6 hours, and interhospital transfers. There were 2 secondary cohorts: (1) the EVT metrics cohort excluded patients with missing data on time from door to arterial puncture and (2) the intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) metrics cohort only included patients receiving IVT ≤4.5 hours after onset. RESULTS: The primary cohort (mean ± standard deviation age = 70.7 ± 14.8 years; 51.2% female; median [interquartile range] baseline NIHSS = 18.0 [13-22]; IVT use, 70.2%) comprised 21,209 patients across 595 hospitals. The EVT metrics cohort and IVT metrics cohort comprised 47,262 and 16,889 patients across 408 and 601 hospitals, respectively. Higher procedural volumes were significantly associated with higher odds (expressed as adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval] for every 10-case increase in volume) of discharge to home (1.03 [1.02-1.04]), functional independence at discharge (1.02 [1.01-1.04]), and lower rates of in-hospital mortality (0.96 [0.95-0.98]). All secondary measures were also associated with procedural volumes. INTERPRETATION: Among AIS patients primarily presenting to EVT-capable hospitals (excluding those transferred from one facility to another and those suffering in-hospital strokes), EVT at hospitals with higher procedural volumes was associated with faster treatment times, better discharge outcomes, and lower rates of in-hospital mortality. ANN NEUROL 2023.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".