ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2023
Prediction Score for Clinical Outcome of Chinese Patients with Cerebral Venous Thrombosis.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2023. 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Key prognostic risk factors linked to poor functional outcomes in cerebral venous sinus thrombosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: Pathophysiologic Insights, Clinical Evaluation Tools, and Novel Therapeutic Strategies.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Distinct long-term neurological trajectories and their predictors in cerebral venous sinus thrombosis: a latent class mixed model analysis.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although numerous prognostic markers for cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) have been reported, inconsistencies exist in their predictive values, leading to contradictory forecasts. This study was designed to develop a comprehensive clinical outcome prediction score for Chinese patients with CVT, integrating key prognostic markers to furnish an overall prognosis. Methods: Participants were selected from the CCC cohort, a multicenter study encompassing 26 tertiary hospitals across mainland China. Between January 2021 and May 2022, 170 patients with CVT were prospectively recruited. Potential prognostic markers were extracted from the CCC database and subsequently analyzed. Results: Age, diastolic blood pressure (DBP), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and neuron-specific enolase (NSE) emerged as significant prognostic markers for CVT after a multivariate logistic analysis. Specific cut-off values were identified: Age > 27.5 years, DBP > 79.5 mmHg, NLR > 6.6, and NSE >16.5 ng/mL. The points assigned were: one each for age and NSE level, two for DBP, and three for NLR, based on the adjusted odds ratio. A positive correlation was found between the baseline CVT outcome score and the mRS at six months' follow-up. A CVT outcome score of 3.5 served as an effective cut-off value for predicting CVT clinical outcomes. Further analysis revealed that patients with CVT outcome scores > 3 exhibited significantly higher mRS scores than those with scores ≤ 3. Conclusion: This study led to the development of the CVT outcome score, consisting of age, DBP, NLR, and NSE level, specifically for Chinese patients with CVT. The baseline CVT outcome score positively correlated with the mRS score at the six-month follow-up. A CVT outcome score of > 3 serves as a reliable indicator to identify patients at a higher risk of unfavorable clinical outcomes. These patients may benefit from additional care and early interventions to avert potential deterioration.
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.