MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416943636 · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.125.052987

Stress Hyperglycemia Ratio and Adverse Outcomes in Acute Mild Ischemic Stroke or High-Risk Transient Ischemic Attack: A Secondary Analysis of the INSPIRES Trial

2025· article· en· W4416943636 on OpenAlexaff
Wenbo Li, Hongyi Yan, Ying Gao, Cong Gao, Wenting Li, Yuesong Pan, S. Claiborne Johnston, Pierre Amarenco, Philip M. Bath, Yilong Wang, Xiaoling Liao

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsPopulation Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIschemic strokeStroke (engine)Adverse effectSecondary preventionTransient (computer programming)Stress hyperglycemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the association between the stress hyperglycemia ratio (SHR) and adverse outcomes in patients with mild ischemic stroke (IS) or high-risk transient ischemic attack remains limited. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of the INSPIRES (Intensive Statin and Antiplatelet Therapy for Acute High-Risk Intracranial or Extracranial Atherosclerosis) randomized clinical trial. SHR was calculated as admission blood glucose (mmol/L) divided by (1.59* HbA1c [%]-2.59). Multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess the association between SHR and adverse clinical outcomes, adjusting for age, sex, and other potential factors. The primary efficacy outcome was any stroke (ischemic or hemorrhagic) within 90 days. Secondary efficacy outcomes comprised composite vascular events, recurrent IS, poor functional outcome, and early neurological deterioration. The primary safety outcome was moderate-to-severe bleeding within 90 days. RESULTS: The INSPIRES trial, ultimately enrolled 6100 patients with mild IS or high-risk transient ischemic attack caused by intracranial or extracranial atherosclerosis, of whom 4515 were included in this secondary analysis. The median age was 65 years (interquartile range, 57-71), and 2894 (64.10%) were male. During the 90-day follow-up, recurrent stroke occurred in 356 patients (7.88%), composite vascular events in 363 (8.04%), recurrent IS in 340 (7.53%), poor functional outcome in 474 (10.51%), and early neurological deterioration in 196 (4.34%). After adjustment for conventional confounders, compared with patients in the lower SHR group (Q1), those with higher SHR levels (Q4) had significantly increased risks of recurrent stroke (hazard ratio [HR], 1.84 [95% CI, 1.30-2.61]), composite vascular events (HR, 1.72 [95% CI, 1.22-2.41]), recurrent IS (HR, 1.79 [95% CI, 1.25-2.55]), poor functional outcome (HR, 1.56 [95% CI, 1.13-2.15]), and early neurological deterioration (HR, 1.62 [95% CI, 1.00-2.61]). In contrast, SHR was not significantly associated with any safety outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with acute mild IS or high-risk transient ischemic attack of presumed atherosclerotic cause, elevated SHR levels were independently associated with increased risks of recurrent stroke, composite vascular events, recurrent IS, poor functional outcome, and early neurological deterioration.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.264 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207