1naresh
Array ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity [type] => guest [service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org [access-type] => Controlled [privilege] => Array ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege [type] => privilege-set [privilege-set] => GUEST ) ) [credentials] => Array ( [method] => guest ) ) ) 1nareshArray ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity [type] => guest [service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org [access-type] => Controlled [privilege] => Array ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege [type] => privilege-set [privilege-set] => GUEST ) ) [credentials] => Array ( [method] => guest ) ) )Table 4:Final models of prediction of mRS ≤1 including either FLAIR-2 volume (model 1) or FLAIR-3 volume (model 2)a
Variables OR 95% CI P Value Final model including FLAIR-2 volume (model 1) FLAIR-2 volume (per 10 cm3 increase) 0.79 0.64–0.97 .026 Age Between 54 and 64 vs <54 years 0.05 0.01–0.32 .017 Between 64 and 74 vs <54 years 1.18 0.22–6.39 Older than 74 vs <54 years 0.09 0.01–0.66 Initial NIHSS score 0.82 0.72–0.93 .003 Reperfusionb Reperfusion ≥90% vs no abnormality 1.47 0.34–6.45 .005 Reperfusion <90% vs no abnormality 0.06 0.01–0.40 Final model including FLAIR-3 volume (model 2) FLAIR-3 volume (per 10 cm3 increase) 0.73 0.56–0.96 .023 Age Between 54 and 64 vs <54 years 0.06 0.01–0.47 .025 Between 64 and 74 vs <54 years 1.54 0.28–8.51 Older than 74 vs <54 years 0.12 0.02–0.81 Initial NIHSS score 0.82 0.71–0.93 .003 Reperfusionb Reperfusion ≥90% vs no abnormality 1.32 0.31–5.67 .008 Reperfusion <90% vs no abnormality 0.06 0.01–0.43
a The Hosmer-Lemeshow test findings were nonsignificant (P = .213 and .969 for models 1 and 2, respectively), indicating a good model fit. The AUC was 0.897 for model 1 and 0.888 for model 2.
b If one changed the threshold from 1 to 2, the variable “persistent occlusion” appeared to be strongly related to the clinical outcome (OR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.01–0.44; P = .004 for model 1; OR, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.01–0.36; P = .002 for model 2)