↓ Skip to main content

Utility of Screening for Cerebral Vasospasm Using Digital Subtraction Angiography

Overview of attention for article published in Stroke, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
Utility of Screening for Cerebral Vasospasm Using Digital Subtraction Angiography
Published in
Stroke, September 2015
DOI 10.1161/strokeaha.115.010081
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Cerebral arterial vasospasm (CVS) is a common complication of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage strongly associated with neurological deterioration and delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI). The utility of screening for CVS as a surrogate for early detection of DCI, especially in patients without clinical signs of DCI, remains uncertain. We performed a retrospective analysis of 116 aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage patients who underwent screening digital subtraction angiography to determine the association of significant CVS and subsequent development of DCI. Patients were stratified into 3 groups: (1) no symptoms of DCI before screening, (2) ≥1 episodes of suspected DCI symptoms before screening, and (3) unable to detect symptoms because of poor examination. Patients asymptomatic before screening had significantly lower rates of CVS (18%) compared with those with transient symptoms of DCI (60%; P<0.0001). None of the 79 asymptomatic patients developed DCI after screening, regardless of digital subtraction angiography findings, compared with 56% of those with symptoms (P<0.0001). Presence of CVS was significantly associated with DCI in those with transient symptoms and in those whose examinations did not permit clear assessment (odds ratio 16.0, 95% confidence interval 2.2-118.3, P=0.003). Patients asymptomatic before screening have low rates of CVS and seem to be at negligible risk of developing DCI. Routine screening of asymptomatic patients seems to have little utility. Screening may still be considered in patients with possible symptoms of DCI or those with examinations too poor to clinically detect symptoms because finding CVS may be useful for risk stratification and guiding management.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 42 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 21%
Professor 5 12%
Student > Master 5 12%
Lecturer 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 10 23%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 35%
Neuroscience 9 21%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 14 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 23 October 2015.
All research outputs
#4,296,741
of 28,833,811 outputs
Outputs from Stroke
#4,619
of 14,324 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,484
of 289,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stroke
#69
of 142 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,833,811 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,324 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 289,773 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 142 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.