ArticleThe Neurohospitalist2012
ABCD2 Score and Large-Artery Atherosclerosis.
Article in The Neurohospitalist, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Risk Score for Predicting Recurrence Following a Cerebral Ischemic Event.Frontiers in neurology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeExtracranial stenosis (ECS) or intracranial stenosis (ICS) are independent risk factors for stroke after transient ischemic attack (TIA). We examined the association of the age, blood pressure, clinical features, duration of symptoms and diabetes (ABCD2) score, a validated risk prediction model for stroke after TIA, and the presence of ICS or ECS.
methodsVascular imaging and ABCD2 scores were obtained in a retrospective cohort of 77 consecutive patients diagnosed with TIA in a single center emergency department. The association between vascular stenosis and ABCD2 scores and how each related to clinical outcome was examined.
resultsIn all, 30 (39.2%) TIA patients had 37 stenotic lesions; 15 (40.5%) stenotic lesions were ICS and 22 (59.5%) stenotic lesions were ECS. A total of 7 patients (9.5%) had both ECS and ICS lesions. Patients with ABCD2 > 3 were more likely to have ICS (odds ratio [OR] = 6.25, confidence interval [CI] 1.39-32.44, P = .009) and ECS (OR = 5.25, CI = 1.56-17.66, P = .005). Of the 37 stenotic lesions, 21 (56.7%) were symptomatic; 4 (19.2%) of these had an ABCD2 ≤ 3. At 7 days, there were 4 ischemic strokes, 3 had previously demonstrated symptomatic stenotic lesions, and all had ABCD2 scores > 3.
conclusionsCompared to patients in the low-risk ABCD2 scores, the patients with medium- to high-risk ABCD2 scores are more likely to have symptomatic and asymptomatic vascular stenotic lesions. However, 1 in 5 patients with low-risk ABCD2 score has symptomatic stenotic lesions, indicating ABCD2 score does not identify all patients with symptomatic stenotic lesions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.