ArticleBMC neurology2025
A multicenter validation and calibration of automated software package for detecting anterior circulation large vessel occlusion on CT angiography.
Article in BMC neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anatomy- and Time-Based Post-Processing with CT Perfusion-Derived Time-Vessel Maps to Reduce Incorrect Occlusion Detections in Late-Phase CT Angiography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- RAPID CTA versus JLK LVO for large vessel occlusion detection: a pragmatic comparison of performance and common pitfalls.Neuroradiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo validate JLK-LVO, a software detecting large vessel occlusion (LVO) on computed tomography angiography (CTA), within a multicenter dataset.
methodsFrom 2021 to 2023, we enrolled patients with ischemic stroke who underwent CTA within 24-hour of onset at six university hospitals for validation and calibration datasets and at another university hospital for an independent dataset for testing model calibration. The diagnostic performance was evaluated using area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity across the entire study population and specifically in patients with isolated middle cerebral artery (MCA)-M2 occlusion. We calibrated LVO probabilities using logistic regression and by grouping LVO probabilities based on observed frequency.
resultsAfter excluding 168 patients, 796 remained; the mean (SD) age was 68.9 (13.7) years, and 57.7% were men. LVO was present in 193 (24.3%) of patients, and the median interval from last-known-well to CTA was 5.7 h (IQR 2.5-12.1 h). The software achieved an AUC of 0.944 (95% CI 0.926-0.960), with a sensitivity of 89.6% (84.5-93.6%) and a specificity of 90.4% (87.7-92.6%). In isolated MCA-M2 occlusion, the AUROC was 0.880 (95% CI 0.824-0.921). Due to sparse data between 20 and 60% of LVO probabilities, recategorization into unlikely (0-20% LVO scores), less likely (20-60%), possible (60-90%), and suggestive (90-100%) provided a reliable estimation of LVO compared with mathematical calibration. The category of LVO probabilities was associated with follow-up infarct volumes and functional outcome.
conclusionIn this multicenter study, we proved the clinical efficacy of the software in detecting LVO on CTA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.