Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26913217›Full record

ArticleMedical student research journal2013

A comprehensive stroke center patient registry: advantages, limitations, and lessons learned.

James E Siegler, Amelia K Boehme, Adrianne M Dorsey, Dominique J Monlezun, Alex J George, Amir Shaban, H Jeremy Bockholt, Karen C Albright, Sheryl Martin-Schild

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical student research journal, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Utilizing the Axon Registry® for quality improvement.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2018
    Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Time to Neurological Deterioration in Ischemic Stroke.Medical student research journal · 2017
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. A Model for Predicting Persistent Elevation of Factor VIII among Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke.Journal of stroke and cerebrovascular diseases : the official journal of National Stroke Association · 2016
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. A simple prediction score for developing a hospital-acquired infection after acute ischemic stroke.Journal of stroke and cerebrovascular diseases : the official journal of National Stroke Association · 2015
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Recurrent posterior strokes in inflammatory bowel disease patients.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2015
    Article
  17. The impact of absent A1 segment on ischemic stroke characteristics and outcomes.Journal of stroke and cerebrovascular diseases : the official journal of National Stroke Association · 2015
    Article
  18. Trimming the fat in acute ischemic stroke: an assessment of 24-h CT scans in tPA patients.International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2015
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors.

James E SieglerTulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Amelia K BoehmeDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA; Department of Neurology, School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Adrianne M DorseyTulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Dominique J MonlezunTulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Alex J GeorgeTulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Amir ShabanStroke Program, Department of Neurology, Tulane University Hospital, New Orleans, LA, USA.
H Jeremy BockholtAdvanced Biomedical Informatics Group, LLC, Iowa City, IA, USA; Department of Psychiatry, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA.
Karen C AlbrightDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA; Department of Neurology, School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA; Health Services and Outcomes Research Center for Outcome and Effectiveness Research and Education (COERE), University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA; Center of Excellence in Comparative Effectiveness Research for Eliminating Disparities (CERED), Minority Health & Health Disparities Research Center (MHRC), University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Sheryl Martin-SchildStroke Program, Department of Neurology, Tulane University Hospital, New Orleans, LA, USA.

Funding

RESEARCH TRAINING COREP60MD000502 · NIMHD · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI FOUAD, MONA N. · 2003 to 2016
$16.2M
UAB Health Services Research (HSR) Training ProgramT32HS013852 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI LEVITAN, EMILY B, MUGAVERO, MICHAEL J · 2003 to 2024
$8.0M
AHRQ HHS T32 HS013852NIMHD NIH HHS P60 MD000502PHS HHS HS013852-07
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe use of a medical data registry allows institutions to effectively manage information for many different investigations related to the registry, as well as evaluate patient's trends over time, with the ultimate goal of recognizing trends that may improve outcomes in a particular patient population.

methodsThe purpose of this article is to illustrate our experience with a stroke patient registry at a comprehensive stroke center and highlight advantages, disadvantages, and lessons learned in the process of designing, implementing, and maintaining a stroke registry. We detail the process of stroke registry methodology, common data element (CDE) definitions, the generation of manuscripts from a registry, and the limitations. ADVANTAGES: The largest advantage of a registry is the ability to prospectively add patients, while allowing investigators to go back and collect information retrospectively if needed. The continuous addition of new patients increases the sample size of studies from year to year, and it also allows reflection on clinical practices from previous years and the ability to investigate trends in patient management over time. LIMITATIONS: The greatest limitation in this registry pertains to our single-entry technique where multiple sites of data entry and transfer may generate errors within the registry. LESSONS LEARNED: To reduce the potential for errors and maximize the accuracy and efficiency of the registry, we invest significant time in training competent registry users and project leaders. With effective training and transition of leadership positions, which are continuous and evolving processes, we have attempted to optimize our clinical research registry for knowledge gain and quality improvement at our center.

Indexed as

common data elementsepidemiological methodsmethodologyregistriessource data verificationstroke

Identifiers

PMID26913217
PMCPMC4762446

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.