Background and Purpose-Patent foramen ovale (PFO) is significantly associated with cryptogenic stroke (CS). However, even in patients with CS, a PFO can be an incidental finding. We sought to estimate the probability that a PFO in a patient with CS is incidental. Methods-A systematic search identified 23 case-control studies examining the prevalence of PFO in patients with CS versus control subjects with stroke of known cause. Using simple assumptions and Bayes' theorem, we calculated the probability a PFO is incidental in patients with CS. Random effects meta-analyses estimated the odds ratio (OR) of a PFO in CS versus control subjects in different age populations, with or without atrial septal aneurysms, and were used to summarize across studies the probability that a PFO in CS is incidental. Results-The summary OR (95% CIs) for PFO in CS versus control subjects was 2.9 (CI, 2.1 to 4.0). The corresponding ORs for young and old patients (Ͻ or Ն55 years) were 5.1 (3.3 to 7.8) and 2.0 (Ͼ1.0 to 3.7), respectively. The corresponding probabilities that a PFO in patients with CS is incidental were 33% (28% to 39%) in age-inclusive studies, 20% (16% to 25%) in younger patients, and 48% (34% to 66%) in older patients. These probabilities were much lower when an atrial septal aneurysm was present. Conclusions-In patients with otherwise CS, approximately one third of discovered PFOs are likely to be incidental and hence not benefit from closure. This probability is sensitive to patient characteristics such as age and the presence of an atrial septal aneurysm, suggesting the importance of patient selection in therapeutic decision-making.
BackgroundThere is increasing interest to make primary data from published research publicly available. We aimed to assess the current status of making research data available in highly-cited journals across the scientific literature.Methods and ResultsWe reviewed the first 10 original research papers of 2009 published in the 50 original research journals with the highest impact factor. For each journal we documented the policies related to public availability and sharing of data. Of the 50 journals, 44 (88%) had a statement in their instructions to authors related to public availability and sharing of data. However, there was wide variation in journal requirements, ranging from requiring the sharing of all primary data related to the research to just including a statement in the published manuscript that data can be available on request. Of the 500 assessed papers, 149 (30%) were not subject to any data availability policy. Of the remaining 351 papers that were covered by some data availability policy, 208 papers (59%) did not fully adhere to the data availability instructions of the journals they were published in, most commonly (73%) by not publicly depositing microarray data. The other 143 papers that adhered to the data availability instructions did so by publicly depositing only the specific data type as required, making a statement of willingness to share, or actually sharing all the primary data. Overall, only 47 papers (9%) deposited full primary raw data online. None of the 149 papers not subject to data availability policies made their full primary data publicly available.ConclusionA substantial proportion of original research papers published in high-impact journals are either not subject to any data availability policies, or do not adhere to the data availability instructions in their respective journals. This empiric evaluation highlights opportunities for improvement.
Nonparoxysmal AF may be a clinically useful proxy for a combination of confounded variables, none of which alone is an independent predictor of AF recurrence. Evaluation of predictors was limited by exclusion of patients with severe heart disease or at the age extremes; thus, the evidence may not be as applicable to these populations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.