Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24105642›Full record

ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2013

Cryptogenic stroke: how to define it? How to treat it?

Ava L Liberman, Shyam Prabhakaran

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current cardiology reports, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Ava L LibermanDepartment of Neurology, Northwestern University-Feinberg School of Medicine, 710 N. Lakeshore Drive, Abbott Hall-Suite 1417, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA.
Shyam Prabhakaran
Abbott (United States) · USNorthwestern University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stroke is a leading cause of disability worldwide. Cryptogenic strokes (CS) account for almost a quarter of ischemic strokes despite modern diagnostic evaluation. A working definition of CS based on stroke classification systems is essential for accurate conceptualization of this common entity. Mechanistic categories (potential paradoxical embolism; atherosclerotic disease of the aorta or supra-aortic vasculature; and occult arrhythmia) should aide in parsing the often heterogeneous mix of conditions included in the CS subtype. Despite efforts to unravel mechanisms of CS, specific or targeted recurrent stroke prevention strategies are lacking. For example, recent trials have shown no clear benefit of patent foramen ovale closure in stroke prevention after CS. There are promising ongoing clinical trials that will address appropriate diagnostic evaluations in CS as well as novel therapeutic interventions. Overall, a standardized approach must be framed to diagnose and manage patients with CS and guide clinical practice and future research.

Indexed as

AnticoagulantsFemaleFunctional NeuroimagingHeart Septal Defects, AtrialHumansIntracranial ArteriosclerosisMalePractice Guidelines as TopicRisk FactorsSecondary PreventionStrokeTachycardiaThrombophiliaTreatment OutcomeUnited StatesVenous ThrombosisAnticoagulants

Identifiers

PMID24105642
OpenAlexW2079136810

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.