MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406992963 · doi:10.1161/str.56.suppl_1.155

Abstract 155: Misdiagnosis in Cervical Artery Dissection: Analysis of STOP-CAD Study

2025· article· en· W4406992963 on OpenAlexaff
Ekaterina Bakradze, Liqi Shu, Shadi Yaghi, Thanh Lam Tran, Ross Crandall, Evan Lester, Daniel Mandel, James E. Siegler, Mary Penckofer, Ava L. Liberman, Thalia S. Field, Farhan Khan, Wayneho Kam, Brian Mac Grory, Faddi Saleh Velez, Nils Henninger, Cheran Elangovan, Balaji Krishnaiah, Preet Gandhi, Reza Bavarsad Shahripour, Malik Ghannam, Mirjam R. Heldner, Antonenko Katheryna, Aaron Rothstein, Issa Metanis, Edgar A. Samaniego, Michele Romoli, Zedde Marialuisa, Thanh N. Nguyen, Farid Khasiyev, Ossama Khazaal, Mohammad AlMajali, Adeel Zubair, Marwa Elnazeir, João Pedro Marto, Omair ul haq Lodhi, Ahmad Nehme, James Giles, Setareh Salehi Omran

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCervical ArteryCADDissection (medical)Vertebral artery dissectionStroke (engine)SurgeryRadiologyCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Cervical artery dissection (CeAD) accounts for a quarter of strokes in young adults. Clinical presentation is often non-specific, leading to a significant proportion of cases being misdiagnosed. This study aims to identify factors contributing to potential misdiagnosis and to assess the impact of misdiagnosis on patient outcomes. Methods: This is a secondary analysis of the Antithrombotics for Stroke Prevention in Cervical Artery Dissection (STOP-CAD), a multicenter cross-sectional international retrospective study of adult patients presenting to an acute care hospital and diagnosed with CeAD. Misdiagnosis of CeAD was determined by identifying any medical encounters for symptoms attributable to the CeAD within the 30 days preceding the diagnosis. Strokes occurring during the interval between the initial misdiagnosis encounter and the final diagnosis date were recorded. We used multivariable regression to identify factors associated with misdiagnosis. The primary outcome was ischemic stroke after CeAD diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included death and excellent functional outcome at 90 days, defined as a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score <2. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to assess the association between misdiagnosis and above outcomes. Results: Of the 4023 patients included in the STOP-CAD study, 4012 were included in this analysis; mean age was 47.5 (+/-13.3) years and 44.6% (1788) were woman. Among these, 663 patients (16.5%) had medical encounters within the 30 days preceding the diagnosis (misdiagnosis group) and 224 (33.8%) had an ischemic stroke after the initial medical encounter but before the CeAD diagnosis. Misdiagnosed patients were younger (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83-0.95, p<0.001), more likely to have a history of migraine (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.09-1.67, p=0.007), present with headache (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.19-1.71, p<0.001) and less likely to present with signs and symptoms concerning for cerebral ischemia (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.56-0.83, p<0.001). There was no significant difference in outcomes between the two groups in adjusted analyses: ischemic stroke (aOR 0.96, 95%CI 0.63-1.48, p=0.87), mRS<2 (aOR 1.04, 95% CI 0.76-1.44, p=0.80) and death (aOR 0.58, 95% CI 0.19-1.8, p=0.34). Conclusion: One in six patients who were ultimately diagnosed with CeAD experienced a possible misdiagnosis. Factors associated with a higher likelihood of misdiagnosis included younger age, a history of migraine, and a non-ischemic clinical presentation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.249 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicAnatomy and Medical TechnologyFrench-language works237,207