You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Development of a new stroke scale in an emergency setting
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Neurology, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12883-016-0695-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Haifeng Mao, Peiyi Lin, Junrong Mo, Yunmei Li, Xiaohui Chen, Timothy H. Rainer, Huilin Jiang |
| Abstract |
Early identification of stroke is crucial to maximize early management benefits in emergency departments. This study aimed to develop and validate a new stroke recognition instrument for differentiating acute stroke from stroke mimics in an emergency setting. A prospective observational cohort study among suspected stroke patients presenting to Emergency Department in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University was conducted from May 2012 to March 2013. The symptoms and signs of suspected stroke patients were collected. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify the factors associated with acute stroke. The symptoms and signs closely associated with acute stroke were selected to develop the new stroke scale, Guangzhou Stroke Scale (GZSS). The diagnostic value of GZSS was then compared with ROSIER, FAST and LAPSS. The primary outcome was confirmed stroke by CT within 24 h. Four hundred and sixteen suspected stroke patients (247 ischemia, 107 hemorrhage, 4 transient ischemic attack, 58 non-stroke) were assessed. A new stroke scale, GZSS (total score from -1 to 8.5), was developed and consisted of nine parameters: vertigo (-1), GCS ≤ 8 (+2), facial paralysis (+1), asymmetric arm weakness (+1), asymmetric leg weakness (+1), speech disturbance (+0.5), visual field defect (+1), systolic blood pressure ≥145 mmHg (+1) and diastolic blood pressure ≥95 mmHg (+1). Among the four scales, the discriminatory value (C-statistic) of GZSS was the best (AUC: 0.871 (p < 0.001) when compared to ROSIER (0.772), LAPSS (0.722) and FAST (0.699). At an optimal cut-off score of >1.5 on a scale from -1 to 8.5, the sensitivity and specificity of GZSS were 83.2 and 74.1 %, whilst the sensitivities and specificities of ROSIER were 77.7 and 70.7 %, FAST were 76.0 and 63.8 %, LAPSS were 56.4 and 87.9 %. GZSS had better sensitivity than existing stroke scales in Chinese patients with suspected stroke. Further studies should be conducted to confirm its effectiveness in the initial differentiation of acute stroke from stroke mimics. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 Kingdom | 3 | 75% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 66 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 20% |
| Unknown | 19 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 36% |
| Neuroscience | 7 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Psychology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 24 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 13 October 2016.
All research outputs
#13,243,556
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#1,032
of 2,441 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,739
of 332,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#34
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,886,568 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,441 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 332,538 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.