Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15338141›Full record

ReviewDer Nervenarzt2005

[Thrombophilias in patients with ischemic stroke. Indication and calculated costs for evidence-based diagnostics and treatment].

R Weber, E Busch

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Nervenarzt, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 54% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

R WeberKlinik für Neurologie, Universitätsklinikum Essen, 45122 Essen.
E Busch
Essen University Hospital · DEKlinik und Poliklinik für Neurologie · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patients with ischemic stroke are sometimes found to have an underlying inherited (deficiency of protein C, protein S, antithrombin III, activated protein C resistance, prothrombin gene mutation, hyperhomocysteinemia) or acquired thrombophilia (lupus anticoagulant and anticardiolipin antibodies, hyperhomocysteinemia). Patient selection for thrombophilia screening is, therefore, a frequent question in managing patients with ischemic stroke. In this review we discuss patient selection and timing for laboratory tests for thrombophilia screening in stroke patients based on a literature review and we calculated overall costs per year in Germany for testing patients older than 18 years with an ischemic stroke of undetermined cause. As there is a lack of studies comparing anticoagulation with antiplatelet therapy in patients with diagnosed thrombophilia, laboratory screening for thrombophilia even in a selected group of patients with cryptogenic ischemic stroke remains of questionable value at present. An exception appears to be testing for lupus anticoagulant and anticardiolipin antibodies in younger patients with suspected antiphospholipid syndrome (two positive test results necessary), because anticoagulation seems to be superior to aspirin in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome.

Indexed as

Brain IschemiaClinical Trials as TopicComorbidityEvidence-Based MedicineFemaleFibrinolytic AgentsGermanyHumansIncidenceMalePrevalenceRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsStrokeThrombophiliaFibrinolytic Agents

Identifiers

PMID15338141
OpenAlexW1532139906

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.