ReviewDer Nervenarzt2020
[Past and future of the ESUS concept].
Review in Der Nervenarzt, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Diagnosis and treatment of vascular dementia].Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie · 2020Article
- Scanning of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation as an etiological risk factor in patients with acute ischemic stroke: prospective study.Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicinaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stroke has traditionally been classified according to the trial of ORG 10172 in acute stroke treatment (TOAST) criteria; however, the concept of cryptogenic stroke did not meet the operational criteria necessary to define patient populations eligible for randomized studies. Therefore, the concept of embolic stroke of undetermined etiology (ESUS) was developed. An underlying hypothesis was that most strokes in patients with ESUS are caused by embolic events, hence, anticoagulation may prevent secondary events. Therefore, two large randomized trials were conducted comparing dabigatran or rivaroxaban with acetylsalicylic acid. Both studies could not show superiority of the new oral anticoagulants (NOAC) compared to aspirin; however, subgroup analyses showed that there is a patient population that may benefit from oral anticoagulation.
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.