ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2026
Possible Diagnostic Error in Cervical Artery Dissection: Analysis of STOP-CAD Study.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 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
43 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCervical artery dissection (CeAD) is a common cause of stroke in young adults but is frequently misdiagnosed due to its nonspecific symptoms. This study examines factors associated with possible diagnostic error in CeAD and evaluates its impact on patient outcomes.
methodsWe conducted a secondary analysis of the STOP-CAD (Antithrombotic Therapy for Stroke Prevention in Cervical Artery Dissection) study, which is a multicenter international study of adult patients admitted with CeAD. Possible diagnostic error was defined as the presence of CeAD symptoms within 30 days before the index CeAD diagnosis. The comparison group included patients diagnosed on their first medical encounter. Multivariable regression was used to identify factors associated with possible diagnostic error. Primary and secondary outcomes included ischemic stroke, death, and modified Rankin Scale score <2.
resultsOf 4012 patients (mean age 47.5 years, 44.6% female), 663 (16.5%) experienced possible diagnostic error. Among these, 224 (33.8%) reported to have ischemic stroke before CeAD diagnosis. Patients with possible diagnostic error were younger (odds ratio [OR], 0.89,
conclusionsOne in 6 patients with CeAD experienced a possible diagnostic error, particularly those who were younger, had migraines, or presented with headaches and nonfocal symptoms.
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.