Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38289912›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Clinical Uncertainty in Large Vessel Occlusion ischemic stroke (CULVO): Does automated perfusion scanning make a difference? Protocol of an intrarater and interrater agreement study.

Jose Danilo Bengzon Diestro, Robert Fahed, Anass Benomar, Abdelsimar T Omar, Vitor Mendes Pereira, Julian Spears, Thomas R Marotta, Pascal Djiadeu, Sunjay Sharma, Forough Farrokhyar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Jose Danilo Bengzon DiestroDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8450-2021
Robert FahedDivision of Neurology, Department of Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1887-5097
Anass BenomarDepartment of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3735-1686
Abdelsimar T OmarDivision of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Vitor Mendes PereiraDivision of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Neuroradiology, Department of Medical Imaging, Unity Health- St Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Julian SpearsDivision of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Neuroradiology, Department of Medical Imaging, Unity Health- St Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Thomas R MarottaDivision of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Neuroradiology, Department of Medical Imaging, Unity Health- St Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2480-2054
Pascal DjiadeuDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Sunjay SharmaDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Forough FarrokhyarDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGuidelines recommend the use of perfusion computed tomography (CT) to identify emergent large vessel ischemic stroke (ELVIS) patients who are likely to benefit from endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) if they present within 6-24 hour (late window) of stroke onset. We aim to determine if the interrater and intrarater reliability among physicians when recommending EVT is significantly different when perfusion CT or non-perfusion CT is reviewed.

methodsA total of 30 non-consecutive patients will be selected from our institutional database comprising 3144 cranial CT scans performed for acute stroke symptoms January 2018 to August 2022. The clinical and radiologic data of the 30 patients will be presented in random order to a group of 29 physicians in two separate sessions at least three weeks apart. In each session, the physicians will evaluate each patient once with automated perfusion images and once without. We will use non-overlapping 95% confidence intervals and difference in agreement classification as criteria to suggest a difference between the Gwet AC1 statistics (κG). DISCUSSION: The results obtained from this study, combined with the clinical outcomes data of patients categorized through the two imaging techniques and a cost-effectiveness analysis, will offer a comprehensive evaluation of the clinical utility of perfusion CT neuroimaging. Should there be no significant disparity in the reliability of decisions made by clinicians using the two neuroimaging protocols, it may be necessary to revise existing recommendations regarding neuroimaging in the later time window to align with these findings.

Indexed as

Brain IschemiaEndovascular ProceduresIschemic StrokeStrokeClinical Decision-MakingHumansPerfusionReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesThrombectomyTreatment OutcomeUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID38289912
PMCPMC10826946

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.