ArticleFrontiers in neurology2024
Mnemonic utilization in stroke education: FAST and BEFAST adoption by certified comprehensive stroke centers.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Examining Stroke Symptom Messages Implemented Globally: A Need for Contextually Relevant Stroke Symptom Messaging.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2026Article
- Knowledge of stroke warning signs, attitudes to emergency activation, and help-seeking practices among adults in a hospital catchment: a single-center KAP study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Knowledge of alarm signs of stroke among caretakers of stroke patients and first contact healthcare providers at two tertiary referral hospitals in Uganda.BMC neurology · 2025Article
- Stroke-related knowledge and warning signs and its association with seeking emergency medical service among urban and rural residents in Huanggang, China.Journal of education and health promotion · 2025Article
- Enhancing Stroke Recognition: A Comparative Analysis of Balance and Eyes-Face, Arms, Speech, Time (BE-FAST) and Face, Arms, Speech, Time (FAST) in Identifying Posterior Circulation Strokes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Symptom recognition and timely access to treatment are critical components of acute stroke care systems. Two mnemonics widely used in public educational campaigns for recognizing stroke symptoms include FAST (Face-Arm-Speech-Time) and BEFAST (Balance-Eyes-Face-Arm Speech-Time). The FAST mnemonic can miss up to 14% of strokes. BEFAST includes common posterior circulation stroke symptoms and has been implemented by several Comprehensive Stroke Centers (CSCs). Methods: We sought to analyze the pattern of public educational materials available on the websites of US CSCs. The Joint Commission (JC) quality check website compiles a list containing the names and locations of the country's 217 JC-certified CSCs, which was downloaded in August, 2022. Each CSC's website was searched for educational material containing FAST and BEFAST mnemonics for stroke symptom recognition. Results: The FAST mnemonic was listed by 35% of CSCs, the BEFAST by 58%, with 7% listing no specific mnemonic. The highest portion of CSCs using BEFAST was in western (65%) and southeastern (63%) states. The highest percentage of CSCs with no listed mnemonic were in the northeastern (14%) and southeastern (13%) states. Conclusion: Consistency is critical in shaping public health education related to stroke symptoms recognition. Our study suggests further effort is needed to unify the public messaging on stroke recognition.
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.