Introducing the Concept of Sanctuary Sites in Ischemic Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The topography of arterial territories has been defined using digital maps of supratentorial infarcts. Regions with a high probability of infarction (Pi) exist in the deep compartment due to a paucity of collaterals. However, less attention has been given to regions with a low Pi. METHODS: -weighted magnetic resonance images were segmented and registered onto a standard brain template (Montreal Neurological Institute 152). Segmented magnetic resonance images were averaged to yield the Pi at a voxel level. The overall Pi for the combined arterial territories was calculated to ensure that Pi was in the range of 0 to 1. Sanctuary sites were identified as regions with Pi <0.1. RESULTS: There were 154 patients (63% men; median age, 69 years; and interquartile range, 57-78 years). The magnetic resonance imaging scan used for segmentation was performed at a median interval of 35 (interquartile range, 3-66) days after stroke onset. Sanctuary sites were present in the frontal (gyrus rectus, the paracentral lobule, and orbitofrontal and precentral gyrus), parietal (postcentral, supramarginal, and angular gyrus, superior and inferior parietal lobule, and precuneus and posterior cingulate), and occipital cortex (cuneus, middle, and superior occipital gyrus). CONCLUSIONS: We propose that following vessel occlusion, there are cortical regions with a low Pi, which we termed sanctuary sites. The anatomic basis for this observation is the compensatory capacity of leptomeningeal collaterals.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".