ArticleScientific reports2023
New insight in massive cerebral infarction predictions after anterior circulation occlusion.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- ZBP1 at the Interface of Nucleic-Acid Stress and Inflammatory Cell Death After Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Hypothesis-Driven Overview.Neurochemical research · 2026Review
- Harnessing cuproptosis: a new avenue for targeted cancer therapies.Apoptosis : an international journal on programmed cell death · 2025Review
- Harnessing cuproptosis: a new avenue for targeted cancer therapies.Apoptosis : an international journal on programmed cell death · 2025Review
- Targeting IL-4/IL-13 Signaling Pathways in Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps: From Mechanisms to Therapies.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2025Review
- Association Between Chinese Visceral Adiposity Index and Risk of Incident Hypertension Among Older Adults: A Prospective Cohort Study.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2025Article
- Evaluation of contralateral arterial flow compensation using transcranial Doppler in acute internal carotid artery occlusion and implications for neurological outcome.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- In vitro screening of understudied PFAS with a focus on lipid metabolism disruption.Archives of toxicology · 2024Article
- Advances in Collateral Neuroimaging for Acute Ischemic Stroke: Redefining Time and Tissue Windows in the Reperfusion Era.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of NeuroimagingReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To predict massive cerebral infarction (MCI) occurrence after anterior circulation occlusion (ACO) by cASPECTS-CTA-CS (combined ASPECTS and CTA-CS). Of 185 cerebral infarction patients with the ACO, their collateral circulation scores from CT angiography (CTA) images in two groups (MCI and non-MCI) were evaluated using Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) and CT angiography collateral score (CTA-CS) approaches. The cASPECTS-CTA-CS was validated internally using the bootstrap sampling method with 1000 bootstrap repetitions and compared to CTA-CS. Receiver-operating characteristic curve (ROC), clinical impact curve (CIC), and decision curve analysis (DCA) strategies were used to assess the clinical practicality and predictability of both approaches (cASPECTS-CTA-CS and CTA-CS). Using net reclassification improvement (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) analyses, discrimination levels of the cASPECTS-CTA-CS were compared with CTA-CS. Classification and regression tree (CART) analyses was conducted to identify the best predictive values and identify subgroup of MCI. The discrimination ability of collateral circulation evaluation score using the cASPECTS-CTA-CS [AUC: 0.918, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.869-0.967, P < 0.01; NRI: 0.200, 95% CI: -0.104 to 0.505, P = 0.197; and IDI: 0.107, 95% CI: 0.035-0.178, P = 0.004] was better than CTA-CS alone (AUC: 0.885, 95% CI: 0.833-0.937, P < 0.01). DCA indicated the net benefits of the cASPECTS-CTA-CS approach was higher than CTA-CS alone when the threshold probability range over 20%. CIC analyses showed that the number of high risks and true positives were in agreement when the threshold probability > 80%. Less than 23 of cASPECTS-CTA-CS by CART was important factor in determining MCI occurrence, and ASPECTS < 7 was followed factor. The cASPECTS-CTA-CS approach cumulatively predicted MCI after ACO.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.