Geographic differences in pharmacotherapy patterns and outcomes of acute ischemic stroke in China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vast economic and healthcare status discrepancies exist among regions in China, contributing to different treatment patterns. This study was aimed to investigate the current status of pharmacotherapy for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and outcomes in China and explore the geographic variation in stroke care. METHODS: This study was a multicenter prospective registry study, which collected the data of patients with AIS from 80 hospitals in 46 cities in 2015-2017 across China. Poor functional outcome defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 3-6 was assessed at 3 and 12 months. Multivariate logistic regression was used. RESULTS: Among 9973 eligible patients, the number of receiving intravenous thrombolysis (IVT), antiplatelet agents, anticoagulants, statin and human urinary kallidinogenase was 429 (4.3%), 9363 (93.9%), 1063 (10.7%), 6828 (74.7%) and 5112 (51.2%), respectively. Multivariable analysis showed IVT use in northeastern was significantly more frequent than in eastern region (OR = 3.17, 95% CI, 2.53-3.99), while the antiplatelets agents use were less frequent (OR = 0.46, 95%CI: 0.38-0.57). The proportions of poor outcomes at 3 and 12 months were 20.7% and 15.8%, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed AIS patients from northeastern and central region had significantly lower risk of poor outcome at month 3 and 12 than those from eastern region (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: There was a low IVT use and a high antiplatelet agent and statin use for AIS in China. The pharmacotherapy and prognosis of AIS had variation by geographic region. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02470624).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".