ArticleEuropean journal of neurology2024
Diagnostic accuracy and radiological validation of intracerebral hemorrhage diagnosis in the Swedish Stroke Register (Riksstroke).
Article in European journal of neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Temporal Increase in Strict Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage Admissions During the First March Following Direct Israel-Iran Hostilities: Preliminary Single-Center Findings from a Decade-Referenced Neuroscience Services Cohort.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Observational
- Sex differences in imaging features including cerebral amyloid angiopathy markers in intracerebral hemorrhage.Frontiers in stroke · 2026Article
- Imaging and Clinical Prognostic Features in Lobar Versus Deep Intracerebral Hemorrhage in an Unselected Swedish Population.European journal of neurology · 2025Article
- Diagnostic accuracy and radiological validation of intracerebral hemorrhage diagnosis in the Swedish Stroke Register (Riksstroke).European journal of neurology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background and purposeNational quality registries for stroke care operate under the assumption that the included patients are correctly diagnosed. We aimed to validate the clinical diagnosis of spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) in Riksstroke (RS) by evaluating radiological data from a large, unselected ICH population.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective, multicenter study including all ICH patients registered in RS between 2016 and 2020 residing in Skåne County in Sweden (1.41 million inhabitants). Radiological data from first imaging were evaluated for the presence of spontaneous ICH. Other types of bleeds were registered if a spontaneous ICH was not identified on imaging. The radiological evaluation was independently performed by one radiology fellow and one senior neuroradiologist.
resultsBetween 2016 and 2020, 1784 ICH cases were registered in RS, of which 1655 (92.8%) had a radiological diagnosis consistent with spontaneous ICH. In the 129 (7.2%) remaining cases, the radiological diagnosis was instead traumatic bleed (n = 80), subarachnoid hemorrhage (n = 15), brain tumor bleed (n = 14), ischemic lesion with hemorrhagic transformation (n = 14), ischemic lesion (n = 3), or no bleed at all (n = 3). There was a higher degree of incorrect coding in the older age groups.
conclusionAt radiological evaluation, 92.8% of ICH diagnoses in RS were consistent with spontaneous ICH, yielding a high rate of agreement that strengthens the validity of the diagnostic accuracy in the register, justifying the use of high coverage quality register data for epidemiological purposes. The most common coding error was traumatic bleeds that were classified as spontaneous ICH.
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.