A multicenter validation and calibration of automated software package for detecting anterior circulation large vessel occlusion on CT angiography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To validate JLK-LVO, a software detecting large vessel occlusion (LVO) on computed tomography angiography (CTA), within a multicenter dataset. METHODS: From 2021 to 2023, we enrolled patients with ischemic stroke who underwent CTA within 24-hour of onset at six university hospitals for validation and calibration datasets and at another university hospital for an independent dataset for testing model calibration. The diagnostic performance was evaluated using area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity across the entire study population and specifically in patients with isolated middle cerebral artery (MCA)-M2 occlusion. We calibrated LVO probabilities using logistic regression and by grouping LVO probabilities based on observed frequency. RESULTS: After excluding 168 patients, 796 remained; the mean (SD) age was 68.9 (13.7) years, and 57.7% were men. LVO was present in 193 (24.3%) of patients, and the median interval from last-known-well to CTA was 5.7 h (IQR 2.5-12.1 h). The software achieved an AUC of 0.944 (95% CI 0.926-0.960), with a sensitivity of 89.6% (84.5-93.6%) and a specificity of 90.4% (87.7-92.6%). In isolated MCA-M2 occlusion, the AUROC was 0.880 (95% CI 0.824-0.921). Due to sparse data between 20 and 60% of LVO probabilities, recategorization into unlikely (0-20% LVO scores), less likely (20-60%), possible (60-90%), and suggestive (90-100%) provided a reliable estimation of LVO compared with mathematical calibration. The category of LVO probabilities was associated with follow-up infarct volumes and functional outcome. CONCLUSION: In this multicenter study, we proved the clinical efficacy of the software in detecting LVO on CTA.
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 | 0.016 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".