MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Image_1_Serial ASPECTS to predict stroke-associated pneumonia after thrombolysis in patients with acute ischemic stroke.JPEG

2024· other· en· W6927406741 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicApplied Advanced Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReceiver operating characteristicThrombolysisLogistic regressionStroke (engine)Area under the curveSwallowingCohortPneumonia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background<p>Stroke-associated pneumonia (SAP) is a serious complication in stroke patients, significantly increasing mortality. The Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) is a recognized predictor of acute ischemic stroke outcomes. We aimed to investigate the performance of serial ASPECTS assessments (baseline ASPECTS, 24-h ASPECTS, and change in ASPECTS) for predicting SAP in patients with thrombolyzed acute anterior circulation ischemic stroke (AACIS).</p>Materials<p>A retrospective observational cohort study of adult patients with thrombolyzed AACIS was conducted. Baseline and 24-h ASPECTS using non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT), complications of stroke, including SAP and swallowing dysfunction using the Modified Water Swallowing test, were collected. Baseline and 24-h ASPECTS were evaluated by a certified neurologist and neuroradiologist. The predictive performance was determined based on the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC). Multivariable logistic regression analyses were employed to assess the impact of serial ASPECTS assessment on predicting SAP.</p>Results<p>Of the 345 patients with thrombolyzed AACIS in our study, 18.4% (64/345) experienced SAP. The patients’ median age was 62 years [interquartile range (IQR): 52–73], with 53.4% being male. The median NIHSS score was 11 points (IQR: 8–17). The ROC analysis revealed areas under the curve for predicting SAP with baseline ASPECTS, 24-h ASPECTS, and change in ASPECTS were 0.75 (95% CI, 0.69–0.82), 0.84 (95% CI, 0.79–0.89), and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.76–0.87), respectively. Of the three measures, 24-h ASPECTS was a better predictor of SAP (odds ratio: 5.33, 95%CI: 2.08–13.67, p < 0.001) and had a higher sensitivity (0.84 [95%CI, 0.74–0.92]) and specificity (0.79 [95%CI, 0.74–0.84]) than both baseline ASPECTS and change in ASPECTS.</p>Conclusion<p>24-h NCCT-ASPECTS outperformed both baseline ASPECTS and change in ASPECTS for predicting SAP. Notably, 24-h ASPECTS, with a cut-off value of ≤6, exhibited good predictive performance and emerged as the better predictor for SAP.</p>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.004

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.187 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicApplied Advanced TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207