Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26494462›Full record

Trial reportNeuroradiology2016

Observer variability of absolute and relative thrombus density measurements in patients with acute ischemic stroke.

Emilie M M Santos, Albert J Yoo, Ludo F Beenen, Olvert A Berkhemer, Mark D den Blanken, Carrie Wismans, Wiro J Niessen, Charles B Majoie, Henk A Marquering, MR CLEAN investigators

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Neuroradiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Emilie M M SantosDepartment of Radiology, Erasmus MC - University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. e.santos@erasmusmc.nl.
Albert J YooTexas Stroke Institute, Plano, TX, USA.
Ludo F BeenenDepartment of Radiology, AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Olvert A BerkhemerDepartment of Radiology, AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Mark D den BlankenDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Physics, AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Carrie WismansDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Physics, AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Wiro J NiessenDepartment of Radiology, Erasmus MC - University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Charles B MajoieDepartment of Radiology, AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Henk A MarqueringDepartment of Radiology, AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
MR CLEAN investigators
Erasmus MC · NLUniversity of Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThrombus density may be a predictor for acute ischemic stroke treatment success. However, only limited data on observer variability for thrombus density measurements exist. This study assesses the variability and bias of four common thrombus density measurement methods by expert and non-expert observers.

methodsFor 132 consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke, three experts and two trained observers determined thrombus density by placing three standardized regions of interest (ROIs) in the thrombus and corresponding contralateral arterial segment. Subsequently, absolute and relative thrombus densities were determined using either one or three ROIs. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was determined, and Bland-Altman analysis was performed to evaluate interobserver and intermethod agreement. Accuracy of the trained observer was evaluated with a reference expert observer using the same statistical analysis.

resultsThe highest interobserver agreement was obtained for absolute thrombus measurements using three ROIs (ICCs ranging from 0.54 to 0.91). In general, interobserver agreement was lower for relative measurements, and for using one instead of three ROIs. Interobserver agreement of trained non-experts and experts was similar. Accuracy of the trained observer measurements was comparable to the expert interobserver agreement and was better for absolute measurements and with three ROIs. The agreement between the one ROI and three ROI methods was good.

conclusionAbsolute thrombus density measurement has superior interobserver agreement compared to relative density measurement. Interobserver variation is smaller when multiple ROIs are used. Trained non-expert observers can accurately and reproducibly assess absolute thrombus densities using three ROIs.

Indexed as

Absorptiometry, PhotonAcute DiseaseAgedAlgorithmsCerebral AngiographyComputed Tomography AngiographyFemaleHumansIntracranial ThrombosisMaleNetherlandsObserver VariationRadiographic Image EnhancementRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityBrain ischemiaComputed tomographyObserver agreementsThromboembolismX-ray

Identifiers

PMID26494462
PMCPMC4773501
OpenAlexW2156262915

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.