MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403269750 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2024.1476937

Prognostic value of multi-PLD ASL-based cerebral perfusion ASPECTS in acute ischemic stroke

2024· article· en· W4403269750 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Qingqing Li, Chaojun Jiang, Linqing Qian, Jing Yang, Tianchi Mu, Congsong Dong, Shu Wang, Zhenyu Wang, Hengheng Liu, Yijun Dong, Zhenyu Dai, Fei Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNantong UniversityGovernment of Jiangsu Province
KeywordsMedicineModified Rankin ScaleCerebral blood flowInternal medicineLogistic regressionCardiologyReceiver operating characteristicMann–Whitney U testPerfusion scanningStroke (engine)Cerebral blood volumeMultivariate analysisPerfusionIschemic strokeIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction We aimed to verify the application value of the Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) based on multiple post-labeling delay (multi-PLD) arterial spin labeling (ASL) for outcome assessment in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients. Method The endpoint was modified Rankin scale score at 90 days (90-day mRS). Patients were divided into the good outcome (0–2) and poor outcome (3–6) groups. The independent samples t-test, Mann-Whitney U-test, and χ2-test were used to compare clinical and imaging parameters between groups. We used partial correlation analysis to evaluate the relationships between ASPECTS and outcomes. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to examine potential independent prognostic indicators. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to evaluate the performance of the independent prognostic indicators in predicting outcomes. Results Fifty-five AIS patients were included. The good outcome group had a lower baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS; Z = −3.413, P < 0.001) and infarct core volume (ICV; Z = −3.114, P = 0.002) as well as higher cerebral blood flow (CBF)-ASPECTS (Z = −3.835, P < 0.001) and cerebral blood volume (CBV)-ASPECTS (Z = −4.099, P < 0.001). Higher CBF-ASPECTS (r = −0.459, P = 0.001), and CBV-ASPECTS (r = −0.502, P < 0.001) were associated with a lower 90-day mRS. The baseline NIHSS, CBF-ASPECTS, and CBV-ASPECTS were identified as independent prognostic indicators. The AUCs of the baseline NIHSS, CBF-ASPECTS, and CBV-ASPECTS were 83.3, 87.4, and 89.9%, respectively. Combining NIHSS with CBF-ASPECTS and CBV-ASPECTS, the AUC significantly improved to 96.3%. The combined three factors showed a significant difference compared to the baseline NIHSS (Z = 2.039, P = 0.041) and CBF-ASPECTS (Z = 2.099, P = 0.036), but no difference with CBV-ASPECTS (Z = 1.176, P = 0.239). Conclusions The ASPECTS based on multi-PLD ASL is a valuable tool for identifying independent prognostic indicators and assessing clinical outcomes in AIS patients. The baseline NIHSS, combined with CBF-ASPECTS and CBV-ASPECTS, enhances the predictive efficacy of clinical outcomes in AIS patients. The CBV-ASPECTS alone can offer comparable predictive efficacy to the combination.

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)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.246
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 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeurologySame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207