Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35645952›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2022

Improving Visualization Methods of Utility-Weighted Disability Outcomes for Stroke Trials.

Ivie Tokunboh, Eleanor Mina Sung, Fiona Chatfield, Nathan Gaines, May Nour, Sidney Starkman, Jeffrey L Saver

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Ivie TokunbohDepartment of Neurology and Comprehensive Stroke Center, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Eleanor Mina SungViterbi School of Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Fiona ChatfieldDepartment of Neurology and Comprehensive Stroke Center, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Nathan GainesDepartment of Neurology and Comprehensive Stroke Center, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
May NourDepartment of Neurology, Division of Interventional Neuroradiology, and Comprehensive Stroke Center, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Sidney StarkmanDepartments of Emergency Medicine and Neurology and Comprehensive Stroke Center, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Jeffrey L SaverDepartment of Neurology and Comprehensive Stroke Center, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The modified Rankin Scale (mRS) is the most common endpoint in acute stroke trials, but its power is limited when analyzed dichotomously and its indication of effect size is challenging to interpret when analyzed ordinally. To address these issues, the utility-weighted-mRS (UW-mRS) has been developed as a patient-centered, linear scale. However, appropriate data visualizations of UW-mRS results are needed, as current stacked bar chart displays do not convey crucial utility-weighting information. Design/Methods: Two UW-mRS display formats were devised: (1) Utility Staircase charts, and (2) choropleth-stacked-bar-charts (CSBCs). In Utility Staircase displays, mRS segment height reflects the utility value of each mRS level. In CSBCs, mRS segment color intensity reflects the utility of each mRS level. Utility Staircase and CSBC figures were generated for 15 randomized comparisons of acute ischemic/hemorrhagic stroke therapies, including fibrinolysis, endovascular reperfusion, blood pressure moderation, and hemicraniectomy. Display accuracy in showing utility outcomes was assessed with the Tufte-lie-factor and ease-of-use assessed by formal ratings completed by a panel of 4 neurologists and emergency physicians and one nurse-coordinator. Results: The Utility Staircase and CSBC displays rapidly conveyed patient-centered valuation of trial outcome distributions not available in conventional ordinal stacked bar charts. Tufte-lie-factor (LF) scores indicated "substantial distortion" of utility-valued outcomes for 93% (14/15) of conventional stacked bar charts, vs. "no distortion" for all Utility Staircase and CSBC displays. Clinician ratings on the Figural Display Questionnaire indicated that utility information encoded in row height (Utility Staircase display) was more readily assimilated than that conveyed in segment hue intensity (CSBC), both superior to conventional stacked bar charts. Conclusions: Utility Staircase displays are an efficient graphical format for conveying utility weighted-modified Rankin Scale primary endpoint results of acute stroke trials, and choropleth-stacked-bar-charts a good alternative. Both are more accurate in depicting quantitative, health-related quality of life results and preferred by clinician users for utility results visualization, compared with conventional stacked bar charts.

Indexed as

acute strokeclinical trialsdisabilityutilityvisual display

Identifiers

PMID35645952
PMCPMC9136165

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.