关于在现代中风研究中如实报告 "成功率 "的重要见解:一个警世故事。

IF 7.8 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Santiago Ortega-Gutierrez, Marc Ribo
{"title":"关于在现代中风研究中如实报告 \"成功率 \"的重要见解:一个警世故事。","authors":"Santiago Ortega-Gutierrez, Marc Ribo","doi":"10.1161/STROKEAHA.124.048972","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In 2015, several trials confirmed the safety and efficacy of mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke. These findings revolutionized acute ischemic stroke treatment and established mechanical thrombectomy as a standard of care. Subsequent studies have further validated that optimal clinical outcomes are closely associated with achieving higher grades of complete reperfusion and minimizing the number of retrieval attempts. As a result, in recent years, the field has seen a growing trend of publications aggressively pursuing the highest rates of angiographic success. This trend is further exacerbated by the proliferation of impressive individual case reports shared on social media platforms, often devoid of significant scientific merit or educational value. We aim to review the potential biases in authors, which may incur when reporting recanalization rates, and underscore the importance of truthfully reporting success rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":21989,"journal":{"name":"Stroke","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Critical Insights on Truthfully Reporting \\\"Success Rates\\\" in Modern Stroke Research: A Cautionary Tale.\",\"authors\":\"Santiago Ortega-Gutierrez, Marc Ribo\",\"doi\":\"10.1161/STROKEAHA.124.048972\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In 2015, several trials confirmed the safety and efficacy of mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke. These findings revolutionized acute ischemic stroke treatment and established mechanical thrombectomy as a standard of care. Subsequent studies have further validated that optimal clinical outcomes are closely associated with achieving higher grades of complete reperfusion and minimizing the number of retrieval attempts. As a result, in recent years, the field has seen a growing trend of publications aggressively pursuing the highest rates of angiographic success. This trend is further exacerbated by the proliferation of impressive individual case reports shared on social media platforms, often devoid of significant scientific merit or educational value. We aim to review the potential biases in authors, which may incur when reporting recanalization rates, and underscore the importance of truthfully reporting success rates.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21989,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Stroke\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Stroke\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.124.048972\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stroke","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.124.048972","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2015 年,多项试验证实了机械性血栓切除术治疗急性缺血性卒中的安全性和有效性。这些研究结果彻底改变了急性缺血性卒中的治疗,并将机械取栓术确立为治疗标准。随后的研究进一步证实,最佳临床疗效与实现更高等级的完全再灌注和尽量减少取栓次数密切相关。因此,近年来,该领域的出版物越来越倾向于积极追求最高的血管造影成功率。在社交媒体平台上分享的大量令人印象深刻的个人病例报告往往缺乏重要的科学价值或教育意义,这进一步加剧了这一趋势。我们旨在探讨作者在报告再通率时可能出现的偏差,并强调如实报告成功率的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Critical Insights on Truthfully Reporting "Success Rates" in Modern Stroke Research: A Cautionary Tale.

In 2015, several trials confirmed the safety and efficacy of mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke. These findings revolutionized acute ischemic stroke treatment and established mechanical thrombectomy as a standard of care. Subsequent studies have further validated that optimal clinical outcomes are closely associated with achieving higher grades of complete reperfusion and minimizing the number of retrieval attempts. As a result, in recent years, the field has seen a growing trend of publications aggressively pursuing the highest rates of angiographic success. This trend is further exacerbated by the proliferation of impressive individual case reports shared on social media platforms, often devoid of significant scientific merit or educational value. We aim to review the potential biases in authors, which may incur when reporting recanalization rates, and underscore the importance of truthfully reporting success rates.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Stroke
Stroke 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
13.40
自引率
6.00%
发文量
2021
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Stroke is a monthly publication that collates reports of clinical and basic investigation of any aspect of the cerebral circulation and its diseases. The publication covers a wide range of disciplines including anesthesiology, critical care medicine, epidemiology, internal medicine, neurology, neuro-ophthalmology, neuropathology, neuropsychology, neurosurgery, nuclear medicine, nursing, radiology, rehabilitation, speech pathology, vascular physiology, and vascular surgery. The audience of Stroke includes neurologists, basic scientists, cardiologists, vascular surgeons, internists, interventionalists, neurosurgeons, nurses, and physiatrists. Stroke is indexed in Biological Abstracts, BIOSIS, CAB Abstracts, Chemical Abstracts, CINAHL, Current Contents, Embase, MEDLINE, and Science Citation Index Expanded.
×
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