ArticlePloS one2018
Diagnostic value of STAF score in combination with D-dimer in cardioembolism.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Prediction of underlying atrial fibrillation in patients with a cryptogenic stroke: results from the NOR-FIB Study.Journal of neurology · 2023Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of the Score for the Targeting of Atrial Fibrillation (STAF) in combination with the serum D-dimer (DD) levels in cardioembolism(CE).This study was a retrospective case-onlystudy, consecutively including patients with acute ischemic stroke. All patients were evaluated following the STAF scoring criteria and were classified according to the Trial of ORG 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment (TOAST) etiology classification criteria. A total of 317 patients were enrolled, including 37 CE cases (11.67%). STAF ≥5 showed a sensitivity of 89% and a specificity of 91% for the diagnosis of CE, whereas DD >791.30 ng/mL had a sensitivity of 58% and a specificity of 78%. When the STAF was used in combination with the DD level, the sensitivity was 95%, and the specificity was 100%.STAF score is an excellent tool for the diagnosis of CE when combined with DD, and can facilitate the etiological classification of acute ischemic stroke.
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.