MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389036816 · doi:10.1515/tnsci-2022-0324

Predicting functional outcome in acute ischemic stroke patients after endovascular treatment by machine learning

2023· article· en· W4389036816 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zhenxing Liu, Renwei Zhang, Keni Ouyang, Botong Hou, Qi Cai, Yu Xie, Yumin Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Neuroscience · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNomogramLogistic regressionMedicineModified Rankin ScaleThrombolysisUnivariateMultivariate statisticsIntracerebral hemorrhageInternal medicineSurgeryMachine learningGlasgow Coma ScaleMyocardial infarctionIschemic strokeIschemiaComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Endovascular therapy (EVT) was the standard treatment for acute ischemic stroke with large vessel occlusion. Prognosis after EVT is always a major concern. Here, we aimed to explore a predictive model for patients after EVT. Method A total of 156 patients were retrospectively enrolled. The primary outcome was functional dependence (defined as a 90-day modified Rankin Scale score ≤ 2). Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator and univariate logistic regression were used to select predictive factors. Various machine learning algorithms, including multivariate logistic regression, linear discriminant analysis, support vector machine, k -nearest neighbors, and decision tree algorithms, were applied to construct prognostic models. Result Six predictive factors were selected, namely, age, baseline National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score, Alberta Stroke Program Early CT (ASPECT) score, modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction score, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH), and complications (pulmonary infection, gastrointestinal bleeding, and cardiovascular events). Based on these variables, various models were constructed and showed good discrimination. Finally, a nomogram was constructed by multivariate logistic regression and showed a good performance. Conclusion Our nomogram, which was composed of age, baseline NIHSS score, ASPECT score, recanalization status, sICH, and complications, showed a very good performance in predicting outcome after EVT.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.693

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTranslational NeuroscienceSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207