ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2024
Quantifying brain health in acute ischemic stroke through effective reserve.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: To quantify brain health using a measure of reserve that incorporates pre-existing pathology. Methods: We analyzed two retrospective ischemic stroke cohorts (GASROS and SALVO) with neuroimaging and 90-day modified Rankin Scores (mRS) available. White matter hyperintensity (WMHv), brain, and intracranial volumes were automatically extracted, and brain parenchymal fraction (BPF) calculated. The latent variable effective reserve (eR) was modeled using age, WMHv, and BPF or brain volume in GASROS. Models were compared using Bayes Information Criterion (BIC). The best model's eR estimates were categorized into quartiles and evaluated in SALVO. Results: GASROS included 476 (median age: 65.8; 65.3% male) and SALVO included 43 (median age: 69.2; 62.8% male) patients. Inverse associations between eR and mRS was seen in both models, with brain volume outperforming BPF (path coefficients: -0.67, -0.48, respectively; p < 0.001; |ΔBIC| = 362). Quartile-based eR stratification in SALVO showed a similar inverse trend, with worse outcomes in the low reserve group (mRS≤2 - highest vs lowest quartile: 85/90% vs 59/45% for GASROS/SALVO). Conclusions: Expanding the concept of eR, highlights its clinical translational potential. The strong link between higher eR and better outcomes underscores its value as a protective brain health metric.
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.