MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391438550 · doi:10.1161/str.55.suppl_1.wp134

Abstract WP134: Door to Angiography in Large Vessel Occlusions Pre and Post Implementation of Automated Image Interpretation and Sharing Platform: A Single Center Study

2024· article· en· W4391438550 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mary Penckofer, Emma Frost, Linda Y. Zhang, Kenyon Sprankle, Nicholas Vigilante, Omnea Elgendy, Jiyoun Ackerman, Abyson Kalladanthyil, Manisha Koneru, Jane Khalife, T. Oma Hester, H Schumacher, Chistopher Love, James E. Siegler

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSingle CenterAngiographyStroke (engine)Computed tomography angiographyRadiologyDemographicsMagnetic resonance angiographyBasilar arteryRetrospective cohort studySurgeryMagnetic resonance imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Viz LVO is an FDA approved software that uses artificial intelligence to identify large vessel occlusions (LVOs) on computed tomography angiography (CTA) and facilitate communication between providers in a hub-and-spoke network. Whether this software expedites patient evaluation for treatment is unexplored. Methods: A single center retrospective registry was queried for patients with LVO of the internal carotid, proximal middle cerebral, or basilar artery in a stroke network (8 spokes, 1 hub). Eligible patients were in a 6-month period before (pre-Viz) and following implementation (post-Viz) of Viz LVO. Descriptive statistics and robust regression modeling were used to describe time from first contact to angiography (primary outcome) and other intervals between pre-Viz and post-Viz study groups. Results: Of 132 included patients (n=58 pre-Viz), small differences were found in demographics and non-significantly fewer patients underwent endovascular therapy (EVT) in the post-Viz period (73.0% vs. 86.2%, p=0.07). Time from spoke arrival to hub arrival among transferred patients was non-significantly shorter post-Viz (median 124 vs. 147 min, p=0.15). In patients who received EVT, there was a non-significant reduction in time from first contact to angiography (median 116 vs. 155 min, p=0.10) with shorter intervals for transferred patients (median 142 vs. 169 min, p=0.05) but not hub arrivals (p=0.81). For transferred patients, shorter intervals from initial contact to angiography were observed in adjusted robust regression, accounting for stroke severity, age, Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Scale score, and use of perfusion imaging (β -32.4, 95% confidence interval -61.6 to -3.26, p=0.03). Conclusions: Implementation of the Viz LVO platform was associated with shorter intervals between initial hospital contact and neurointervention among transferred patients. Larger datasets are needed to validate these observations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.295 · 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→