186,898 research outputs found
Thrombolysis is associated with consistent functional improvement across baseline stroke severity: a comparison of outcomes in patients from the Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive (VISTA)
No full text<p><b>Background and Purpose:</b> Baseline stroke severity predicts outcomes among thrombolysed patients. The baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) thresholds are sometimes used to select patients for thrombolysis, clinical trial enrollment, or both. Using data lodged with Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive, we compared adjusted outcomes between thrombolysed and nonthrombolysed patients enrolled in neuroprotection trials (1998-2007) to assess the influence of various levels of baseline NIHSS.</p>
<p><b>Method:</b> We assessed the association of treatment with outcome, measured across the modified Rankin scale score distribution, in patients categorized by baseline NIHSS in increments of 4. We used an age and baseline NIHSS adjusted Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test followed by proportional odds logistic regression analysis. We report the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel P values and estimated odds ratios (OR) for improved modified Rankin scale score distribution with treatment for patients within each baseline NIHSS category.</p>
<p><b>Results:</b> Data were available for 5817 patients (1585 thrombolysed and 4232 nonthrombolysed). Baseline severity was greater among thrombolysed than nonthrombolysed (median baseline NIHSS, 14 vs 13; P<0.05). An association of treatment with outcome was seen independently and was of similar magnitude within each of the baseline NIHSS categories 5 to 8 (P=0.04; OR, 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0-1.6; N=278/934 thrombolysed/nonthrombolysed), 9 to 12 (P=0.01; OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.6; N=404/942), 13 to 16 (P<0.05; OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.3-2.1; N=342/814), 17 to 20 (P<0.05; OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.3-2.1; N=311/736), and 21 to 24 (P<0.05; OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1; N=178/466). No association was observed within baseline NIHSS categories 1 to 4 (P=0.8; OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.3-4.4; N=8/161) or >= 25 (P=0.08; OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.7-1.9; N=64/179).</p>
<p><b>Conclusions:</b> In this nonrandomized comparison, outcomes after thrombolysis were significantly better than in untreated comparators across baseline NIHSS 5 to 24. The significant association was lost only at extremes of baseline NIHSS when sample sizes were small and confidence limits were wide.</p>
Immunotherapy
No full textA chapter covering metastasis immunotherapy in multi-author volume devoted to all aspects of cancer metastasis
Does hemispheric lateralization influence functional and cardiovascular outcomes after stroke?: an analysis of placebo-treated patients from prospective acute stroke trials
No full text<p><b>Background and Purpose:</b> The influence of stroke lateralization on functional and cardiovascular outcome after stroke is not well established. We evaluated the influence of hemispheric lateralization among patients enrolled in prospective acute stroke trials.</p>
<p><b>Methods:</b> We obtained data from the VISTA database for acute stroke trials which reported lateralization. Baseline data, cardiac adverse events, and 90-day outcomes were compared between right and left hemisphere stroke patients. A "hemisphere unbiased" subscore of the NIHSS which omitted items strongly associated with lateralized cognitive deficits was also compared for trials which reported individual NIHSS item scores. A multivariable analysis of outcome predictors was performed.</p>
<p><b>Results:</b> Three acute stroke trials met the prespecified inclusion criteria. 1644 placebo-treated patients with documented hemispheric lateralization were included in the analysis. Baseline NIHSS was higher for left hemisphere patients (mean 16.2, versus 12.8 right, P < 0.001); there was no difference in the "hemisphere unbiased" NIHSS subscore (10.88 left, 11.08 right, n=687, P= 0.49). There was no difference between hemispheres in 90-day modified Rankin Score (3.43 left, 3.29 right, P=0.13), mortality (22.1% left, 19.5% right, P=0.20), or cardiac adverse events (P=0.71). Hemispheric lateralization was not an independent predictor of outcome in the multivariable analysis after controlling for the hemispheric bias intrinsic to the NIHSS.</p>
<p><b>Conclusions:</b> There is no difference in functional outcome between patients with right or left hemisphere stroke. Use of the baseline NIHSS score to predict stroke outcome must take hemispheric lateralization into account. Stroke lateralization is not an important predictor of cardiac adverse events or 90-day mortality.</p>
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.
No full textAuthor-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.</p
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
No full textThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
No full textWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
sj-jpg-1-ves-10.1177_15385744211046245 – Supplemental Material for Catastrophic Antiphospholipid Syndrome Following Lower Extremity Arterial Bypass Surgery: Case Report and Evidence Review
No full textSupplemental Material, sj-jpg-1-ves-10.1177_15385744211046245 for Catastrophic Antiphospholipid Syndrome Following Lower Extremity Arterial Bypass Surgery: Case Report and Evidence Review by Ahmed A. Sorour, Levester Kirksey, Sarah Keller, Michael S. O’Connor and Sean P. Lyden in Vascular and Endovascular Surgery</p
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
No full textWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
Dr. Edward P. Wimberly, ITC, July 2011
No full textThis video is a conversation with Dr. Edward P. Wimberly. Dr. Wimberly talks about his book, "No Shame in Wesley's Gospel: A Twenty-First Century Pastoral Gospel". Brad Ost, AUC Woodruff Library, is the interviewer
- …
