Comparison of accuracy, sensitivity and specifity of Bahrudin score vs Siriraj score vs Gajah Mada algorithm in diagnosing type of stroke

IF 1.3 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Mochamad Bahrudin , Probo Yudha Pratama Putra , Dinda Amalia Eka Putri
{"title":"Comparison of accuracy, sensitivity and specifity of Bahrudin score vs Siriraj score vs Gajah Mada algorithm in diagnosing type of stroke","authors":"Mochamad Bahrudin ,&nbsp;Probo Yudha Pratama Putra ,&nbsp;Dinda Amalia Eka Putri","doi":"10.1016/j.hest.2022.07.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Rapid diagnosis is crucial for stroke patients since it is an emergency that may result in morbidity and mortality. The gold standard, which is a CT scan of the brain is not always feasible, hence, Siriraj and Bahrudin Score, as well as Gajah Mada Algorithm are likely to be alternatives.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>This study aims to determine the specificity and sensitivity of the Siriraj and Bahrudin Score as well as Gajah Mada Algorithm.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>A cross-sectional study was undertaken at five network hospitals of the Medical Faculty University in Muhammadiyah Malang. It involves a sample of 304 medical records used to determine the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve with output area under the curve (AUC).</p></div><div><h3>Result</h3><p>The result showed that the sensitivity and specificity of Bahrudin and Siriraj Acore, as well as Gajah Mada Algorithm for determining infarct stroke was 91.3% vs 89.7% vs 61.2% and 67.7% vs 69.4% vs 77.4%, respectively. For determining hemorrhagic stroke the values were 67.7% vs 69.4% vs 77.4% and 91.3% vs 89.7% vs 61.2%, respectively. Furthermore, the area under the curve of Bahrudin and Siriraj Scores was better than Gajah Mada Algorithm.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In conclusion, Bahrudin and Siriraj Scores have good accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity in diagnosing stroke than Gajah Mada Algorithm.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":33969,"journal":{"name":"Brain Hemorrhages","volume":"3 4","pages":"Pages 184-188"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589238X22000481/pdfft?md5=231cb7a7cc75bd16b42d88c99de8f940&pid=1-s2.0-S2589238X22000481-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brain Hemorrhages","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589238X22000481","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Rapid diagnosis is crucial for stroke patients since it is an emergency that may result in morbidity and mortality. The gold standard, which is a CT scan of the brain is not always feasible, hence, Siriraj and Bahrudin Score, as well as Gajah Mada Algorithm are likely to be alternatives.

Objectives

This study aims to determine the specificity and sensitivity of the Siriraj and Bahrudin Score as well as Gajah Mada Algorithm.

Method

A cross-sectional study was undertaken at five network hospitals of the Medical Faculty University in Muhammadiyah Malang. It involves a sample of 304 medical records used to determine the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve with output area under the curve (AUC).

Result

The result showed that the sensitivity and specificity of Bahrudin and Siriraj Acore, as well as Gajah Mada Algorithm for determining infarct stroke was 91.3% vs 89.7% vs 61.2% and 67.7% vs 69.4% vs 77.4%, respectively. For determining hemorrhagic stroke the values were 67.7% vs 69.4% vs 77.4% and 91.3% vs 89.7% vs 61.2%, respectively. Furthermore, the area under the curve of Bahrudin and Siriraj Scores was better than Gajah Mada Algorithm.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Bahrudin and Siriraj Scores have good accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity in diagnosing stroke than Gajah Mada Algorithm.

Bahrudin评分、Siriraj评分和Gajah Mada算法诊断脑卒中类型的准确性、敏感性和特异性比较
快速诊断对脑卒中患者至关重要,因为这是一种可能导致发病率和死亡率的紧急情况。黄金标准,即脑部CT扫描并不总是可行的,因此,Siriraj和Bahrudin Score以及Gajah Mada算法可能是替代方案。目的探讨Siriraj评分和Bahrudin评分以及Gajah - Mada算法的特异性和敏感性。方法在默罕默迪亚玛琅医科大学的五家网络医院进行横断面研究。它涉及304份医疗记录样本,用于确定灵敏度、特异性、准确性和受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线及其曲线下输出面积(AUC)。结果Bahrudin和Siriraj Acore以及Gajah Mada算法对脑梗死的敏感性和特异性分别为91.3%、89.7%、61.2%和67.7%、69.4%、77.4%。对于出血性卒中的判定,分别为67.7% vs 69.4% vs 77.4%和91.3% vs 89.7% vs 61.2%。此外,Bahrudin和Siriraj评分曲线下面积优于Gajah Mada算法。结论Bahrudin和Siriraj评分在脑卒中诊断中的准确性、敏感性和特异性均优于Gajah Mada算法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Brain Hemorrhages
Brain Hemorrhages Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
52
审稿时长
22 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信