MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6911030965 · doi:10.5061/dryad.tmpg4f4x3

Supplementary references from: Thrombus composition, imaging, and outcome prediction in acute ischemic stroke

2020· dataset· en· W6911030965 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2020
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThrombolysisThrombusAcute strokeStroke (engine)ThrombosisIschaemic strokeBrain ischemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose of the Review: This article reviews the biochemical, structural, and imaging characteristics of intracranial thrombi in acute ischemic stroke; the relationship between thrombus composition and response to lytic and endovascular therapies; and current and future directions for improving outcomes in acute stroke patients based on thrombus characteristics. Recent Findings: New imaging techniques have advanced our ability to capture thrombus characteristics and burden in real-time, An improved understanding of recanalization rates with thrombolysis and endovascular thrombectomy based on thrombi has spurred interest in new acute therapies for acute stroke. Summary: Thrombus composition, size, location, and timing from stroke onset correlate with imaging findings in acute ischemic stroke and are associated with clinical outcome. Further research across multiple domains could assist in better applying our knowledge of thrombi to patient selection and individualization of acute therapies.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.206
Threshold uncertainty score0.690

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2060.095

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→French-language works237,207→