ArticleJMIR medical informatics2021
Usage Patterns of Web-Based Stroke Calculators in Clinical Decision Support: Retrospective Analysis.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex and gender classification in clinical decision-support tools: a cross-sectional review of tools on MDCalc.Biology of sex differences · 2026Review
- Humans and Large Language Models in Clinical Decision Support: A Study with Medical Calculators.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2024Article
- Review
- Clinical risk calculators informing the decision to admit: A methodologic evaluation and assessment of applicability.PloS one · 2022Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinical scores are frequently used in the diagnosis and management of stroke. While medical calculators are increasingly important support tools for clinical decisions, the uptake and use of common medical calculators for stroke remain poorly characterized.
objectiveWe aimed to describe use patterns in frequently used stroke-related medical calculators for clinical decisions from a web-based support system.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective study of calculators from MDCalc, a web-based and mobile app-based medical calculator platform based in the United States. We analyzed metadata tags from MDCalc's calculator use data to identify all calculators related to stroke. Using relative page views as a measure of calculator use, we determined the 5 most frequently used stroke-related calculators between January 2016 and December 2018. For all 5 calculators, we determined cumulative and quarterly use, mode of access (eg, app or web browser), and both US and international distributions of use. We compared cumulative use in the 2016-2018 period with use from January 2011 to December 2015.
resultsOver the study period, we identified 454 MDCalc calculators, of which 48 (10.6%) were related to stroke. Of these, the 5 most frequently used calculators were the CHA
conclusionsThe most frequently used stroke calculators were the CHA
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.