MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415464822 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-107566

Prevalence and risk factors of paediatric acute ischaemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

2025· article· en· W4415464822 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ping Wang, Shulin Jiang, Li Xia, Yitao Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtocol (science)EpidemiologyPublic healthMEDLINERisk assessmentHealth services research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Paediatric acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) is a rare but severe neurological condition, often leading to long-term disability and considerable societal burden. Compared with adults, paediatric AIS exhibits distinct clinical characteristics and aetiologies, making early identification and prevention more challenging. This study aims to systematically review the prevalence and risk factors of paediatric AIS, providing a comprehensive evidence base for clinical prevention and management. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic search will be conducted across major databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library, from inception to August 2025. We will include observational studies reporting on the prevalence or risk factors of paediatric AIS. Two independent reviewers will screen the literature, extract data and assess study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Meta-analysis will be performed using RevMan 5.4 and StataMP 16.0. Heterogeneity will be evaluated using the I² statistic, and subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be conducted as needed. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system will be used to assess the quality of evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Because no patients were involved, ethical approval was not required. The final results of this research will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal or presented at relevant conferences, and any deviations from this protocol will be recorded and explained in the final report. REGISTRATION: This study has been registered in the PROSPERO (PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD420251067538).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.065
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.076
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0650.076
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.021
Bibliometrics0.0090.008
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0070.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0760.008

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→