Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15121813›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Royal Society of Medicine2004

Prehospital thrombolysis--calculated health benefit for catchment population of one hospital.

Mark Kroese, David Kanka, Peter Weissberg, Barbara Arch, John Scott

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Mark KroesePublic Health Genetics Unit, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Worts Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK. mark.kroese@srl.cam.ac.uk
David Kanka
Peter Weissberg
Barbara Arch
John Scott

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The health benefit of thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction is greatest when patients are treated soon after onset of symptoms. One approach to reducing treatment delay is to give thrombolysis before the patient reaches hospital. When an ambulance trust proposed a prehospital thrombolysis service, local commissioners requested an estimate of its possible health impact. Clinical audit and ambulance trust data were obtained for 165 patients who received thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction in the coronary care unit of a local hospital in one year. This information was then used to estimate the health impact of prehospital thrombolysis in the local population in a mathematical model derived from the results of trials comparing prehospital and hospital thrombolysis. The best predicted local health benefit from the proposed prehospital thrombolysis service is that, if 45 minutes can be cut off the call-to-needle time, 61 cases of acute myocardial infarction need to be treated to save one additional life at 35 days. By use of published research data, the health benefits of prehospital thrombolysis can be estimated for a local population. Variables in the treatment population and ambulance service will influence the size of the health benefit that can be achieved.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overEmergency Medical ServicesEnglandFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionThrombolytic TherapyTime FactorsTransportation of PatientsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID15121813
PMCPMC1079463

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.