Prevalence and Clinical Implications of Hemosiderin Deposits in Recent Small Subcortical Infarcts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: A quarter of ischemic strokes are of lacunar clinical subtype and have an underlying recent small subcortical infarct (RSSI), but their long-term outcomes remain poorly characterized. Hemosiderin deposits (HDs) have been noted in RSSIs at chronic stages and might mimic primary hemorrhage. We characterized HDs' morphology, frequency, and clinical relevance. METHODS: Participants with RSSIs were identified from a prospective longitudinal study and evaluated on 3T MRI including susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) from stroke diagnosis to 12 months. We categorized HDs in RSSIs on SWI at all available time points into 4 types (spots, smudge, rim, cluster) and assessed their associations with demographic factors, stroke-related factors, and image markers with adjusted logistic regression. RESULTS: < 0.01), but not the Fazekas score, number of microbleeds, basal ganglia mineral deposit score, or clinical outcomes. DISCUSSION: HDs occur commonly in RSSIs and may be associated with infarct volume and SVD score. Hemosiderin "rim" is common in RSSIs, urging caution to avoid mistaking ischemic RSSI for primary hemorrhage in subacute and chronic stages.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".