↓ Skip to main content

Wake-Up Stroke and Stroke of Unknown Onset: A Critical Review

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
72 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 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.
Title
Wake-Up Stroke and Stroke of Unknown Onset: A Critical Review
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, August 2014
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2014.00153
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anke Wouters, Robin Lemmens, Patrick Dupont, Vincent Thijs

Abstract

Patients, who wake up with an ischemic stroke, account for a large number of the total stroke population, due to circadian morning predominance of stroke. Currently, this subset of patients is excluded from revascularization-therapy since no exact time of onset is known. A large group of these patients might be eligible for therapy. In this review, we assessed the current literature about the hypothesis that wake-up-strokes occur just prior on awakening and if this subgroup differs in characteristics compared to the overall stroke population. We looked at the safety and efficacy of thrombolysis and interventional techniques in the group of patients with unknown stroke-onset. We performed a meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of the diffusion-FLAIR mismatch in identifying stroke within 3 and 4.5 h. The different imaging-selection criteria that can be used to treat these patients are discussed. Additional research on imaging findings associated with recent stroke and penumbral imaging will eventually lead to a shift from a rigid time-frame based therapy to a tissue-based individualized treatment approach.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 2 2%
Sweden 1 1%
Unknown 88 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 15%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Other 10 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Other 17 19%
Unknown 17 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 49%
Neuroscience 9 10%
Engineering 3 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 27 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 11 July 2016.
All research outputs
#15,982,712
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#6,327
of 14,768 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,420
of 243,936 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#27
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,768 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 243,936 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 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 60% of its contemporaries.