Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
June 1, 2020Open Access

The methodology can be used to show disagreement in decisions for thrombectomy, justifying that sufficient clinical uncertainty exists to warrant additional randomized trials.

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Why the study?

Clinical uncertainty and equipoise are vague notions that play important roles in medical care and research, and methods were needed to measure them regarding rival management options prior to randomized trials.

Design

Methodology paper and illustrative review

Authors

RFRobert FahedTDTim E. DarsautBFBehzad Farzin

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

May help identify thrombectomy cases with equipoise; extends reliability methods to decision-making but requires validation before guiding trials.

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Cite This Study

Fahed et al. (2020) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1b92578df86b99f942e160https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.2.22528/v2
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Measuring Clinical Uncertainty and Equipoise by Applying the Agreement Study Methodology to Patient Management Decisions2020
  2. 2Science in Medical Practice: Probability and Clinical Judgment Instead of Surrogate Certainty2026
  3. 3Measuring Agreement in Diagnostics: A Practical Guide for Researchers2025 · 7 citations
  4. 4Mind the gap: Bayesian equipoise calibration of clinical trial designs2026
  5. 5Assessing method agreement for paired repeated binary measurements administered by multiple raters2018 · 1 citations