1991
DOI: 10.1161/01.str.22.11.1431
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Deriving clinical prediction rules from stroke outcome research.

Abstract: Background and Purpose. Our purpose was to determine whether clinical prediction rules could be derived from current stroke outcome research.Summary of Report. We reviewed 92 articles on stroke outcome research to determine their suitability for implementation as a clinical prediction rule. Methodological problems in many of these studies made implementation of their results as a clinical prediction rule difficult.Conclusions. Implementation of stroke outcome research as clinical prediction rules would be faci… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
35
0
2

Year Published

1995
1995
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 103 publications
3
35
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…[26][27][28] This analysis addresses many concerns about previous reports of outcome prediction after stroke related to the importance of involving multiple centers and representative samples, adequate sample size, and inclusion of comprehensive and validly measured clinical predictive and outcome variables. 7,[29][30][31] This analysis also used a representative sample of individuals hospitalized after stroke for rehabilitation after the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services implemented the IRF prospective payment system in January 2002. 32 Although FIM score dominates outcome prediction in this analysis for the average effect, with low P values and confidence limits indicating its precision, the wide range of scores at admission that are associated with favorable outcome in each category may indicate that other factors not considered here are influential (eg, education and socioeconomic status).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[26][27][28] This analysis addresses many concerns about previous reports of outcome prediction after stroke related to the importance of involving multiple centers and representative samples, adequate sample size, and inclusion of comprehensive and validly measured clinical predictive and outcome variables. 7,[29][30][31] This analysis also used a representative sample of individuals hospitalized after stroke for rehabilitation after the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services implemented the IRF prospective payment system in January 2002. 32 Although FIM score dominates outcome prediction in this analysis for the average effect, with low P values and confidence limits indicating its precision, the wide range of scores at admission that are associated with favorable outcome in each category may indicate that other factors not considered here are influential (eg, education and socioeconomic status).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Наличие коронарной пато-логии, хронической сердечной недостаточности, клапанных пороков, разнообразных аритмий, эпизодов ишемии миокарда и нарушений ав-тономной регуляции сердца могут неблагоприятно повлиять на темпы постинсультного восстановления [114,138,199,213]. Нарушения ритма сердца могут негативно влиять на репаративные процессы в зоне цере-бральной ишемии [130,248], поэтому изучение особенностей биоэлек-трической активности сердца у больных АГ в остром периоде ИИ явля-ется актуальным.…”
Section: предисловиеunclassified
“…Усугубление кардиальных расстройств, включая ангинозные приступы, сердечную недостаточность, нарушения ритма сердца, может отяго-щать и замедлять процесс реабилитации, поэтому важно адекватно оценить имеющиеся кардиальные нарушения и риск связанных с ними осложнений [29,30]. В связи с этим самостоятельную проблему представляет реаби-литация больных с сочетанной кардиальной и цере-бральной патологией.…”
Section: проблемы нейрореабилитации при сочетанной церебральной и карunclassified