MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391438488 · doi:10.1161/str.55.suppl_1.wmp69

Abstract WMP69: Brain Atrophy and White Matter Disease Agreement on NCCT and MRI in Ischemic Stroke

2024· article· en· W4391438488 on OpenAlexaff
William Betzner, Nishita Singh, Ibrahim Alhabli, Fouzi Bala, Faysal Benali, Kaden Lam, Mohammed Almekhlafi, Brian Buck, Luciana Catanese, Tolulope T. Sajobi, Aleksander Tkach, Bijoy K. Menon, Richard H. Swartz, Aravind Ganesh

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of ManitobaFoothills Medical CentreMcMaster UniversityUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrophyStroke (engine)White matterDiseaseIschemic strokeMagnetic resonance imagingCardiologyRadiologyPathologyIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: NCCT is the most widely used parenchymal imaging for acute stroke. Evaluations of brain frailty measures like atrophy and white matter disease (WMD) are becoming increasingly relevant in stroke outcome prediction but are conventionally thought to be best seen on MRI. We assessed the agreement between baseline NCCT and follow-up MRI ratings of brain atrophy and WMD and compared their predictive validity in relation to 90-day functional outcomes in acute ischemic stroke. Methods: In this post-hoc analysis of baseline NCCT and follow-up MRI data from the Alteplase compared to Tenecteplase (AcT) randomised-controlled trial, expert readers (stroke neurologists and radiologists) assessed atrophy using the global cortical atrophy (GCA), Koedam, and medial temporal lobe atrophy scales. WMD was measured using the Fazekas scale. Binary agreement (none-mild vs. moderate-severe) and agreement across the full range of scores between atrophy and WMD measures on NCCT and MRI were calculated using Gwet’s agreement coefficient (AC1). Logistic regressions and Delong’s test were used to compare the area under the curve (AUC) for the prediction of 90-day modified Rankin score (mRS) 0-1 when using NCCT vs MRI-based ratings for each atrophy and WMD variable. Results: Of 1577 patients included in the AcT trial, 491 had interpretable NCCT+MRI. Binary agreement was substantial (AC1:0.68-0.80) for deep and total WMD scores, Koedam scale and frontal GCA. Almost perfect binary agreement (AC1:0.81-0.97) was found for all other measures. Deep white matter showed a significant difference between NCCT and MRI ratings for predicting 90-day mRS 0-1 (MRI AUC = 0.61 [0.56-0.66], CT AUC = 0.56 [0.50-0.60], p = 0.01, Delong p = 0.02) There was no significant difference in predicting 90-day mRS for the other variables (all p > 0.12, GCA: MRI AUC = 0.54 [0.49-0.60] CT AUC = 0.53 [0.47-0.58], p = 0.58, Delong p = 0.86). Conclusion: NCCT ratings of brain atrophy and WMD by experts have substantial to almost-perfect agreement with MRI atrophy and WMD ratings and achieve similar prediction of 90-day mRS 0-1 functional outcomes in acute stroke patients. This implies that it is reasonable to use NCCT scans to evaluate these brain frailty measures in clinical practice and in stroke trials.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases→French-language works237,207→