ArticleCerebrovascular diseases (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Social Factors Influencing Decision-Making in Intracerebral Haemorrhage: A Survey among Neurology Professionals.
Article in Cerebrovascular diseases (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIntracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) is the most severe type of stroke characterized by high morbidity and mortality rates. While prognostic scales aim to predict outcomes based solely on medical information, clinicians' assessments may be influenced by patients' social factors, potentially resulting in inequitable care.
methodsA cross-sectional study using a vignette-based survey presenting five pairs of fictitious ICH cases (10 total) was distributed to professionals involved in ICH patient care. Each pair included identical medical data and a comparable computed tomography scan. Social factors - including family status, employment, home status, and medical history - were varied. Respondents assessed prognosis, recommended management, and identified key factors influencing their decisions. Only healthcare professionals involved in the treatment of neuro-intensive care patients were eligible to participate.
resultsA total of 172 responses were collected, of which 156 were from physicians. Statistically significant differences were observed across all case pairs with regard to prognosis, initial management, and further treatment. Cases with less favourable social backgrounds were more likely to result in delayed treatment or recommendations for palliative care. Notably, when participants were asked which factors influenced their decisions, only an average of 10-11% acknowledged that social factors had played a role in their clinical reasoning.
conclusionsSocial factors seem to influence clinicians' prognostic assessments and management decisions in ICH cases, suggesting unconscious bias is present. These findings highlight the need for strategies to ensure equitable treatment, for example, bias-awareness training.
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.