SynthesisJournal of neurology2019
Patient delay in TIA: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of neurology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Risk of Ischemic Stroke After Transient Ischemic Attack in Patients Receiving Comprehensive Versus Noncomprehensive Diagnostic Workup: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Pooled it
- Biomarkers for Transient Ischemic Attack: A Brief Perspective of Current Reports and Future Horizons.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Clinical Study of Clopidogrel Combined with Huoxue Tongluo Prescription in Improving Transient Ischemic Attack and the Effect on MMP-9, Hcy, and CRP.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2022Article
- Delays in Presentation Time Under the COVID-19 Epidemic in Patients With Transient Ischemic Attack and Mild Stroke: A Retrospective Study of Three Hospitals in a Japanese Prefecture.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients who suffer a transient ischemic attack (TIA) have a high short-term risk of developing ischemic stroke, notably within the first 48 h. Timely diagnosis and urgent preventive treatment substantially reduce this risk. We conducted a systemic review to quantify patient delay in patients with (suspected) TIA, and assess determinants related to such delay.
methodsA systematic review using MEDLINE and EMBASE databases up to March 2017 to identify studies reporting the time from onset of TIA symptoms to seeking medical help.
resultsWe identified nine studies providing data on patient delay, published between 2006 and 2016, with 7/9 studies originating from the United Kingdom (UK). In total 1103 time-defined TIA patients (no remaining symptoms > 24 h), and 896 patients with a minor stroke (i.e., mild remaining symptoms > 24 h) were included (49.1% men, mean age 72.2 years). Patient's delay of more than 24 h was reported in 33.1-44.4% of TIA patients, with comparable proportions for minor stroke patients. Delays were on average shorter in patients interviewed at the emergency department than among patients seen at TIA outpatient clinics. Univariably associated with a shorter delay were (1) a longer duration of symptoms, (2) motor symptoms, (3) a higher ABCD2 score, and (4) correct patient's recognition as possible ischemic cerebrovascular event.
conclusionsMore than a third of patients experiencing a TIA delays medical attention for more than a day, thus critically extending the initiation of stroke preventive treatment. There still seems to be insufficient awareness among lay people that symptoms suggestive of TIA should be considered as an emergency. Additional data and multivariable analyses are needed to define main determinants of patient delay.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.