ArticleFrontiers in neurology2024
Comparison of outcomes between anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapies for intracranial arterial dissections.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to evaluate real-world data on the differences in outcomes between antiplatelet (AP) and anticoagulation (AC) therapies for intracranial arterial dissection (IAD). Methods: This study included patients with symptomatic unruptured IAD between 2010 and 2021 that were treated with anti-thrombotics. Patients were dichotomized to AC and AP based on a treatment policy analysis. Primary endpoints were a composite of ischemic early neurological deterioration, recurrent ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke, or 3-month mortality. Arterial changes were evaluated both in the early (during admission) and late (after discharge) periods. A treatment effectiveness analysis was also performed with AC, AP and a third group of antithrombotic cross-overs. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to adjust significant baseline differences. Results: In unruptured IAD patients ( Conclusion: In patients with unruptured IAD, this study did not show differences in primary endpoints according to antithrombotic regimen, while there was a high rate of cross-overs from AC to AP.
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.