ReviewArchives of academic emergency medicine2026
Diagnostic Accuracy of the ACT-FAST Tool for Prehospital Stroke Identification: A Systematic Review.
Review in Archives of academic emergency medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Stroke is the second leading cause of death globally, resulting in 5.5 million deaths annually. The ACT-FAST is a simplified, rapid assessment tool aimed at improving the early detection of stroke and may outperform existing tools in identifying large vessel occlusions (LVOs). We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of this tool in this systematic review. Methods: In this systematic review, we conducted a comprehensive search of Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase. Studies with incomplete data reporting or those focusing on other triage tools were excluded. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full texts, and extracted relevant data using a pre-designed checklist. Results: Our systematic review identified four studies on the ACT-FAST tool, all conducted primarily in Australia with a predominantly elderly patient population. Reported findings indicate that ACT-FAST has demonstrated generally high diagnostic performance, with retrospective analyses showing accuracies above 90%. Sensitivity varied across study designs, ranging from 63% to 100%, while specificity was consistently reported above 85%. Despite concerns regarding potential bias from non-random patient selection and incomplete reporting of symptom onset, the overall methodological quality was robust. Conclusion: The ACT-FAST algorithm demonstrates generally high, though variable, sensitivity and consistently high specificity, supporting its utility as a valuable tool for paramedics and clinicians in prehospital stroke management and for effectively identifying patients with LVO. This capability facilitates timely intervention, minimizes unnecessary transfers for patients without LVO, and optimizes resource allocation, ultimately improving patient outcomes in stroke care.
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.