ArticleThe Neurohospitalist2020
Cohort Study of Features Used by Experts to Diagnose Transient Ischemic Attack.
Article in The Neurohospitalist, 2020. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advance Consent for participation in Acute Stroke Trials (ACTION): protocol for a feasibility study.Stroke and vascular neurology · 2025Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeThe diagnosis of transient ischemic attack (TIA) is largely dependent on a process of clinical decision-making that remains poorly characterized in the absence of a validated and accessible biomarker or imaging test. We performed a retrospective chart review to identify variables associated with a final neurologist diagnosis of TIA/stroke.
methodsRecords for all patients seen in The Ottawa Hospital's Stroke Prevention Clinic in 2015 were analyzed for patient and referral characteristics, features of the presenting neurological event, and final diagnosis by a stroke neurologist (classified as definite, possible, or definite not TIA/stroke). Multinomial logistic regression analysis with backward elimination was used to identify variables associated with the final diagnosis.
resultsOur inclusion criteria were met by 1894 patients. After backward elimination, 23 potentially important variables were identified, including monocular vision loss (odds ratio [OR]: 30.4, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.6-63.3), symptoms of sudden onset (OR: 28.3, 95% CI: 14.2-56.2), unilateral weakness affecting 2 or 3 of face, arm, or leg (OR: 17.7, 95% CI: 9.8-31.7), and homonymous hemianopia (OR: 16.6, 95% CI: 8.1-34.0).
conclusionsAccurate diagnosis of TIA is essential to initiating appropriate secondary stroke prevention therapies. A focus on elements of the patient history most commonly associated with a final diagnosis of TIA/stroke may help to identify patients in greatest need of urgent SPC assessment and allow for the provision of effective and efficient stroke prevention services.
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.