Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26920396›Full record

ReviewIndian journal of pediatrics2016

Imaging of Pediatric Stroke.

Aashim Bhatia, Sumit Pruthi

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Indian journal of pediatrics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Aashim BhatiaDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, Monroe Carell, Jr. Children's Hospital at Vanderbilt, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA.
Sumit PruthiDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, Monroe Carell, Jr. Children's Hospital at Vanderbilt, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. sumit.pruthi@vanderbilt.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite being as common as brain tumors in children, lack of awareness of pediatric stroke presents unique challenges, both in terms of diagnosis and management. Due to diverse and overlapping risk factors, as well as variable clinical presentations, the diagnosis can be either missed or frequently delayed. Early recognition and treatment of pediatric stroke is however critical in optimizing long-term functional outcomes, reducing morbidity and mortality, and preventing recurrent stroke. Neuroimaging plays a vital role in achieving this goal. The advancements in imaging over the last two decades have allowed for multiple modality options for suspected stroke with more accurate diagnosis, as well as quicker turnaround time in imaging diagnosis, especially at primary stroke centers. However, with the multiple imaging possibilities, referring physicians can be overwhelmed with the best option for each clinical situation and what the literature recommends. Here the authors review the etiology of pediatric stroke in the settings of arterial ischemia, hemorrhage, and cerebral sinovenous thrombosis (CSVT), with emphasis on the best diagnostic tools available, including advanced imaging techniques.

Indexed as

ChildHumansNeuroimagingRisk FactorsSinus Thrombosis, IntracranialStrokeArterial ischemic strokeHemorrhagic strokeVenous thrombosisVessel wall imaging

Identifiers

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.