ArticleThe Neurohospitalist2019
Effect of Clinical History on Interpretation of Computed Tomography for Acute Stroke.
Article in The Neurohospitalist, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe assessed whether providing detailed clinical information alongside computed tomography (CT) images improves their interpretation for acute stroke.
methodsUsing the prospective Cornell AcutE Stroke Academic Registry, we randomly selected 100 patients who underwent noncontrast head CT within 6 hours of transient ischemic attack or minor acute ischemic stroke and underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) within 6 hours of the CT. Three radiologist investigators evaluated each of the 100 CT studies twice, once with and once without accompanying information on medical history, signs, and symptoms. In random sequence, each study was interpreted in one condition (ie, with or without detailed accompanying information) and then after a 4-week washout period, in the opposite condition. Using MRI diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) as the reference standard, we classified CT interpretations as correct (true positives or negatives) or incorrect (false positives or negatives). We used logistic regression with sandwich estimators to compare the proportion of correct interpretations.
resultsIn patients with DWI-defined infarcts, acute ischemia was called on 20% of CTs with detailed history and 18% without history. In patients without infarcts, the absence of ischemia was called on 77% of CTs with history and 77% without history. The proportion of correct interpretations of CTs accompanied by detailed clinical history (49%) did not differ significantly from those without history (47%; odds ratio: 1.1; 95% confidence interval: 0.8-1.4).
conclusionsReported findings on head CT for evaluation of suspected acute ischemic stroke were similar regardless of whether detailed clinical history was provided.
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.