Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29441421›Full record

ReviewCurrent atherosclerosis reports2018

Diagnostic Error in Stroke-Reasons and Proposed Solutions.

Ekaterina Bakradze, Ava L Liberman

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current atherosclerosis reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Diagnostic Error in Neuro-ophthalmology: Avenues to Improve.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2022
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Diagnostic error and neuro-ophthalmology.Current opinion in neurology · 2019
    Review
  16. Article
  17. 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.

Ekaterina BakradzeThe Saul R. Korey Department of Neurology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, 3316 Rochambeau Avenue, 4th Floor, Bronx, NY, 10467, USA. ebakradz@Montefiore.org.
Ava L LibermanThe Saul R. Korey Department of Neurology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, 3316 Rochambeau Avenue, 4th Floor, Bronx, NY, 10467, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewWe discuss the frequency of stroke misdiagnosis and identify subgroups of stroke at high risk for specific diagnostic errors. In addition, we review common reasons for misdiagnosis and propose solutions to decrease error. RECENT

findingsAccording to a recent report by the National Academy of Medicine, most people in the USA are likely to experience a diagnostic error during their lifetimes. Nearly half of such errors result in serious disability and death. Stroke misdiagnosis is a major health care concern, with initial misdiagnosis estimated to occur in 9% of all stroke patients in the emergency setting. Under- or missed diagnosis (false negative) of stroke can result in adverse patient outcomes due to the preclusion of acute treatments and failure to initiate secondary prevention strategies. On the other hand, the overdiagnosis of stroke can result in inappropriate treatment, delayed identification of actual underlying disease, and increased health care costs. Young patients, women, minorities, and patients presenting with non-specific, transient, or posterior circulation stroke symptoms are at increased risk of misdiagnosis. Strategies to decrease diagnostic error in stroke have largely focused on early stroke detection via bedside examination strategies and a clinical decision rules. Targeted interventions to improve the diagnostic accuracy of stroke diagnosis among high-risk groups as well as symptom-specific clinical decision supports are needed. There are a number of open questions in the study of stroke misdiagnosis. To improve patient outcomes, existing strategies to improve stroke diagnostic accuracy should be more broadly adopted and novel interventions devised and tested to reduce diagnostic errors.

Indexed as

Diagnostic ErrorsHumansRisk FactorsStrokeDiagnostic errorPatient safetyStroke chameleonsStroke mimicsStroke misdiagnosis

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.