Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23056247›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2012

Why people do, or do not, immediately contact emergency medical services following the onset of acute stroke: qualitative interview study.

Joan E Mackintosh, Madeleine J Murtagh, Helen Rodgers, Richard G Thomson, Gary A Ford, Martin White

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Mistrust of Researchers Correlates with Stroke Knowledge among Minority Seniors in a Community Intervention Trial.Journal of stroke and cerebrovascular diseases : the official journal of National Stroke Association · 2020
    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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Joan E MackintoshInstitute of Health and Society, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Madeleine J Murtagh
Helen Rodgers
Richard G Thomson
Gary A Ford
Martin White
Newcastle University · GBUnited Kingdom Clinical Research Collaboration · GB

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-0606-1241
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo identify the reasons why individuals contact, or delay contacting, emergency medical services in response to stroke symptoms.

designQualitative interview study with a purposive sample of stroke patients and witnesses, selected according to method of accessing medical care and the time taken to do so. Data were analysed using the Framework approach.

settingArea covered by three acute stroke units in the north east of England.

participantsNineteen stroke patients and 26 witnesses who had called for help following the onset of stroke symptoms.

resultsFactors influencing who called emergency medical services and when they called included stroke severity, how people made sense of symptoms and their level of motivation to seek help. Fear of the consequences of stroke, including future dependence or disruption to family life, previous negative experience of hospitals, or involving a friend or relations in the decision to access medical services, all resulted in delayed admission. Lack of knowledge of stroke symptoms was also an important determinant. Perceptions of the remit of medical services were a major cause of delays in admission, with many people believing the most appropriate action was to telephone their GP. Variations in the response of primary care teams to acute stroke symptoms were also evident.

conclusionsThe factors influencing help-seeking decisions are complex. There remains a need to improve recognition by patients, witnesses and health care staff of the need to treat stroke as a medical emergency by calling emergency medical services, as well as increasing knowledge of symptoms of stroke among patients and potential witnesses. Fear, denial and reticence to impose on others hinders the process of seeking help and will need addressing specifically with appropriate interventions. Variability in how primary care services respond to stroke needs further investigation to inform interventions to promote best practice.

trial registrationUK Clinical Research Network UKCRN 6590.

Indexed as

Surveys and QuestionnairesAdultAgedAged, 80 and overDecision MakingEmergency Medical ServicesFamilyFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CareQualitative ResearchStroke

Identifiers

PMID23056247
PMCPMC3464281
OpenAlexW2083265787

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.