Dynamic and visual nomograms to online predict unfavorable outcome of mechanical thrombectomy for acute basilar artery occlusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The evidence of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) in basilar artery occlusion (BAO) was limited. This study aimed to develop dynamic and visual nomogram models to predict the unfavorable outcome of MT in BAO online. METHODS: BAO patients treated with MT were screened. Preoperative and postoperative nomogram models were developed based on clinical parameters and imaging features. An independent dataset was collected to perform external validation. Web-based calculators were constructed to provide convenient access. RESULTS: A total of 127 patients were included in the study, and 117 of them were eventually included in the analysis. The nomogram models showed robust discrimination, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) of 0.841 (preoperative) and 0.916 (postoperative). The calibration curves showed good agreement. The preoperative predictors of an unfavorable outcome were previous stroke, the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) at admission, and the posterior circulation Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score (pc-ASPECTS). The postoperative predictors were previous stroke, NIHSS at 24 h, and pc-ASPECTS. CONCLUSION: Dynamic and visual nomograms were constructed and validated for the first time for BAO patients treated with MT, which provided precise predictions for the risk of an unfavorable outcome. The preoperative model may assist clinicians in selecting eligible patients, and the postoperative model may facilitate individualized poststroke management.
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 | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".