Observational studyNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2023
Application of the "1-2-3-4-day" rule to stroke severity at baseline versus at 24 h to start direct oral anticoagulant for atrial fibrillation within 7 days from symptom onset.
Observational study in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2023. 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.
- Optimal timing of anticoagulation after ischemic stroke in atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Article
- The optimal timing for initiating oral anticoagulant in ischemic stroke combined with non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients: A real-world big data analysis.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of this study is to compare the "1-2-3-4-day" rule applied to stroke severity at baseline versus at 24 h to start DOAC for AF within 7 days from symptom onset. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe conducted a prospective cohort observational study based on 433 consecutive AF-related stroke patients starting DOAC within 7 days from symptom onset. Four groups were identified according to the timing of DOAC introduction: 2-day, 3-day, 4-day, and 5-7-day.
resultsThree models of multivariate ordinal regression including unbalanced variables among four groups (enrolment year, dyslipidemia, known AF, thrombolysis, thrombectomy, hemorrhagic transformation, DOAC type) were used to estimate the association of neurological severity categories (reference: NIHSS > 15) at baseline (Brant test: 0.818), at 24 h (Brant test: 0.997), and radiological severity categories (reference: major infarct) at 24 h (Brant test: 0.902) in the direction of earlier DOAC introduction on days (from 5-7-day to 2-day). Number of deaths was higher in early DOAC group than in late DOAC group according to the "1-2-3-4-day" rule (5.4% versus 1.3%, 6.8% versus 1.1%, and 4.2% versus 1.7% when it was applied to baseline neurological severity, 24-h neurological and radiological severity, respectively), but no significant difference was found and deaths were not caused by early DOAC introduction. Rates of ischemic stroke and intracranial hemorrhage were not different between early and late DOAC groups.
conclusionsThe application of "1-2-3-4-day" rule to start DOAC for AF within 7 days from symptom onset differed when applied to baseline neurological stroke severity versus 24-h neurological and radiological severity, but safety and effecacy are similar.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36881162What 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.