ArticleBMJ neurology open2024
Development and internal validation of prehospital prediction models for identifying intracerebral haemorrhage in suspected stroke patients.
Article in BMJ neurology open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- DIAGnosis using NOvel technology for Subtypes In Stroke (DIAGNOSIS study): performance evaluation protocol.BMJ neurology open · 2026Article
- Integrating clinical predictors and glial fibrillary acidic protein in prediction models for the prehospital identification of intracerebral haemorrhage in suspected stroke.BMJ neurology open · 2025Article
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
Abstract
Introduction: Distinguishing patients with intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) from other suspected stroke cases in the prehospital setting is crucial for determining the appropriate level of care and minimising the onset-to-treatment time, thereby potentially improving outcomes. Therefore, we developed prehospital prediction models to identify patients with ICH among suspected stroke cases. Methods: Data were obtained from the Field Administration of Stroke Therapy-Magnesium prehospital stroke trial, where paramedics evaluated multiple variables in suspected stroke cases within the first 2 hours from the last known well time. A total of 19 candidate predictors were included to minimise overfitting and were subsequently refined through the backward exclusion of non-significant predictors. We used logistic regression and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) models to evaluate the performance of the predictors. Model performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), confusion matrix metrics and calibration measures. Additionally, models were internally validated and corrected for optimism through bootstrapping. Furthermore, a nomogram was built to facilitate paramedics in estimating the probability of ICH. Results: We analysed 1649 suspected stroke cases, of which 373 (23%) were finally diagnosed with ICH. From the 19 candidate predictors, 9 were identified as independently associated with ICH (p<0.05). Male sex, arm weakness, worsening neurological status and high systolic blood pressure were positively associated with ICH. Conversely, a history of hyperlipidaemia, atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, ischaemic stroke and improving neurological status were associated with other diagnoses. Both logistic regression and XGBoost demonstrated good calibration and predictive performance, with optimism-corrected sensitivities ranging from 47% to 49%, specificities from 89% to 90% and AUCs from 0.796 to 0.801. Conclusions: Our models demonstrate good predictive performance in distinguishing patients with ICH from other diagnoses, making them potentially useful tools for prehospital ICH management.
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.