Location, size, and risk factors of incident covert brain infarcts in patients with acute non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke: PACIFIC-STROKE trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Covert brain infarcts (CBIs) identified by imaging are more frequent than symptomatic ischemic strokes and are usually small and/or involve non-eloquent brain areas. The spectrum of incident CBIs in patients following acute ischemic stroke has not been well characterized. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Exploratory observational cohort study of the size, location, multiplicity and risk factors of incident CBIs identified using serial MRIs in patients with acute non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke participating in the PACIFIC-STROKE trial. RESULTS: Incident CBIs were identified in 16% (220/1358) of participants during the mean 5.6-month interval between MRIs. Single incident CBIs occurred in 150 (68%) of incident CBI patients and multiple CBIs in 70 (32%); 42% (93/220) of incident CBI patients had a single, small, subcortical CBI. There was no clear relationship between the location of incident CBI and the location of index stroke. Significant independent features associated with incident CBI included diabetes (adjusted OR 1.52, 95%CI 1.09-2.12), current tobacco use (adjusted OR 1.50, 95%CI 1.07-2.09), prior stroke/TIA (adjusted OR 1.59, 95%CI 1.08-2.36), carotid artery atherosclerosis (adjusted OR 1.47, 95%CI 1.07-2.02), and diastolic blood pressure (adjusted OR 1.02 per 1 mmHg increase, 95%CI 1.01-1.04). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Incident CBIs in patients following acute non-cardioembolic stroke were frequent, usually small and subcortical, and associated with traditional stroke risk factors. Observations from PACIFIC-STROKE, particularly the absence of correlation between the location of incident CBI and the index infarct and the high frequency of incident small, subcortical CBIs, suggest that incident CBI pathogenesis is complex and heterogeneous in this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04304508).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".