| Title |
Transient ischemic attacks: predictability of future ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack events
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.2147/tcrm.s54810 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Harsh V Gupta, Ann M Farrell, Manoj K Mittal |
| Abstract |
The short-term risk of an ischemic stroke after a transient ischemic attack (TIA) is estimated to be approximately 3%-10% at 2 days, 5% at 7 days, and 9%-17% at 90 days, depending on active or passive ascertainment of ischemic stroke. Various risk prediction scores are available to identify high-risk patients. We present here a pragmatic review of the literature discussing the main scoring systems. We also provide the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for each scoring system. Our review shows that scoring systems including brain imaging and vascular imaging are better at risk prediction than scores that do not include this information. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 22% |
| Chile | 1 | 11% |
| Nigeria | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 56% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 56% |
| Members of the public | 3 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 16% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 12 | 22% |
| Unknown | 10 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 44% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Engineering | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 12 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 August 2016.
All research outputs
#6,847,956
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#334
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,458
of 319,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#5
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 319,281 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.