Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38585349›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2024

TOAST stroke subtype classification in clinical practice: implications for the Get With The Guidelines-Stroke nationwide registry.

Cecelia M Rathburn, Katherine T Mun, Latisha K Sharma, Jeffrey L Saver

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. SIRT1 and miR-34a as Potential Plasma Biomarkers in the Acute Phase of Ischemic Stroke.International journal of molecular and cellular medicine · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
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.

Cecelia M RathburnDepartment of Neurology and Comprehensive Stroke Center, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Katherine T MunDepartment of Neurology and Comprehensive Stroke Center, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Latisha K SharmaDepartment of Neurology and Comprehensive Stroke Center, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Jeffrey L SaverDepartment of Neurology and Comprehensive Stroke Center, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States.

Funding

Los Angeles - Southern California NINDS Stroke Trial Network (LASC NSTN)U10NS086497 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI SAVER, JEFFREY L, SUNG, GENE YONG · 2013 to 2017
$2.0M
NINDS NIH HHS U10 NS086497
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The TOAST (Trial of ORG 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment) is the most commonly used ischemic stroke subtype classification system worldwide and a required field in the US National Get With The Guidelines-Stroke (GWTG-Stroke) registry. However, stroke diagnostics have advanced substantially since the TOAST classification was designed 30 years ago, potentially making it difficult to apply reliably. Methods: In this prospective diagnostic accuracy study, we analyzed consecutive ischemic stroke patients admitted to a Comprehensive Stroke Center between July-October 2021. Clinical practice TOAST classification diagnoses rendered by the stroke team in the electronic medical record (EMR) at discharge were retrieved from GWTG-Stroke registry and compared to a reference ("gold") standard diagnosis derived from agreement between two expert raters after review of the EMR and patient imaging. Results: Among 49 patients; age was 72.3 years (±12.1), 53% female, and presenting NIHSS median 3 (IQR 1-11). Work-up included: brain imaging in 100%; cardiac rhythm assessment in 100%; cervical/cerebral vessel imaging in 98%; TTE ± TEE in 92%; and TCD emboli evaluation in 51%. Reference standard diagnoses were: LAA-6%, SVD-14%, CE-39%, OTH-10%, UND-M (more than one cause)-20%, and UND-C (cryptogenic)-10%. GWTG-Stroke TOAST diagnoses agreed with reference standard diagnoses in 30/49 (61%). Among the 6 subtype diagnoses, specificity was generally high (84.8%-97.7%), but sensitivity suboptimal for LAA (33%), OTH (60%), UND-M (10%), and UND-C (20%). Positive predictive value was suboptimal for 5 of the 6 subtypes: LAA (13%), SVD (58%), OTH (75%), UND-M (50%), and UND-C (50%). Discussion: Clinical practice TOAST classification subtype diagnoses entered into the GWTG-Stroke registry were accurate in only 61% of patients, a performance rate that, if similarly present at other centers, would hamper the ability of the national registry to provide dependable insights into subtype-related care. Development of an updated ischemic stroke subtype classification system, with algorithmic logic embedded in electronic medical records, is desirable.

Indexed as

GWTGischemic strokeregistrysubtype classificationTOAST

Identifiers

PMID38585349
PMCPMC10995393

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.