Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35949262›Full record

ReviewFaculty reviews2022

Recent advances in the management of transient ischemic attacks.

Jorge Ortiz-Garcia, Camilo R Gomez, Michael J Schneck, José Biller

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Faculty reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06196047 (Ticagrelor Versus Cilostazol in Ischemic Stroke), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT06196047 phase3recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Ticagrelor Versus Cilostazol in Ischemic Stroke

TypeinterventionalSponsorKafrelsheikh UniversityRan2023 to 2024Enrolled900ConditionsIschemic StrokeArmsTicagrelor 90 MG, Cilostazol 100 MG
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. TRPM2-mediated CaCell communication and signaling : CCS · 2023
    Review
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

4 authors.

Jorge Ortiz-GarciaDepartment of Neurology, The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA.
Camilo R GomezDepartment of Neurology, University of Missouri Columbia, Columbia, MO, USA.
Michael J SchneckDepartment of Neurology, Loyola University Chicago, Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL, USA.
José BillerDepartment of Neurology, Loyola University Chicago, Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transient ischemic attack (TIA) constitutes an important clinical condition, indicating the presence of considerable risk for a subsequent ischemic stroke. Its prompt diagnosis and management have the potential for reducing the risk of neurologic disability, highlighting the critical need to prioritize the care of patients with TIA. The risk of ischemic stroke following a TIA is directly related to its etiopathogenesis, and recognizable causes are commonly categorized within one of three domains: cerebrovascular pathology, cardiac dysfunction, and hematologic disorders. Therefore, the clinical approach to patients suspected of having suffered a TIA demands a comprehensive evaluation, including testing of possible etiologic conditions in all three of these domains, best carried out in an expedited fashion since the stroke risk is greatest in the hours and days that follow the index event. The present is a review of the existing literature addressing the diagnosis, evaluation, prioritization, and management strategies available to clinicians who provide care to patients with TIA.

Indexed as

anticoagulantsantiplatelet therapyarterial revascularizationstroke risk stratificationTIAtransient ischemic attack

Identifiers

PMID35949262
PMCPMC9340656

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.