MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403442553 · doi:10.1038/s41597-024-03973-y

Age-specific ASPECTS atlas of Chinese subjects across different age groups for assessing acute ischemic stroke

2024· article· en· W4403442553 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Qi Sun, Guan Wang, Jinzhu Yang, Yimo Zhou, Yuliang Yuan, Yan Huang, Ziyu Fu

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Data · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHigher Education Discipline Innovation ProjectNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsIschemic strokeAtlas (anatomy)Stroke (engine)MedicineGerontologyInternal medicineIschemiaAnatomyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score (ASPECTS) is a valuable and easy-to-use method for assessing acute ischemic stroke. It aids in identifying suitable candidates for thrombolytic therapies and evaluating treatment effectiveness. However, ASPECTS evaluation primarily relies on visual observation in current clinical practice, lacking a common standardized space. Additionally, different doctors may have varying clinical experiences, leading to a poor inter-reader agreement and potential errors in the final ASPECTS scoring. To address these issues and fill in the absence of a publicly available ASPECTS atlas, this work constructs age-specific Chinese ASPECTS atlases based on non-contrast computed tomography images of 281 healthy subjects across different age groups. Images of different age groups are warped into respective common averaged spaces, where the average intensity atlases are computed. More importantly, 10 ASPECTS regions can be obtained during this process. We develop an automated ASPECTS region mapping pipeline and collect an independent dataset to validate our atlas. The results prove that the age-specific ASPECTS atlas is of great promise in clinical availability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.388
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific DataSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207