The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Diagnostic Accuracy of Stroke Referrals From Primary Care, Emergency Room Physicians, and Ambulance Staff Using the Face Arm Speech Test
Open accessAbstract
Background and Purpose— Timely referral of appropriate patients to acute stroke units is necessary for effective provision of skilled care. We compared the characteristics of referrals with suspected stroke to an academic acute stroke unit via 3 primary referral routes: ambulance paramedics using a rapid ambulance protocol and stroke recognition instrument, the Face Arm Speech Test; primary care doctors (PCDs); and emergency room (ER) referrals. Methods— Patient characteristics, final diagnosis, and admission delay were recorded in all suspected acute stroke referrals in a 6-month period. Results— Four hundred eighty-seven patients (356 strokes/transient ischemic attacks) were admitted by the 3 routes: 178 by ambulance, 216 by PCDs, and 93 through the ER. The proportion of nonstrokes admitted by each route was similar (23%, 29%, and 29%, respectively). Ambulance paramedics’ stroke diagnosis was correct in 144 of 183 (79%) stroke patients who initially presented to them. Thirty-nine of 66 strokes/transient ischemic attacks referred via ER were taken there following initial ambulance assessment. Compared with PCDs, paramedics referred more total anterior circulation (39% versus 14%, P <0.0001) and fewer lacunar strokes (14% versus 31%, P <0.001) and admitted more patients (46% versus 12%, P <0.01) within 3 hours of symptom onset. The most common nonstroke conditions were seizures, infections and confusion, cardiovascular collapse, and cerebral tumors. Paramedics admitted more patients with seizures. Conclusions— Misdiagnosis of stroke is common in the ER and by PCDs. Paramedics using the Face Arm Speech Test achieved high levels of detection and diagnostic accuracy of stroke.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Field, J. M., Hazinski, M. F., Sayre, M. R., Chameides, L., Schexnayder, S. M., Hemphill, R., Samson, R. A., Kattwinkel, J., Berg, R. A., Bhanji, F., et al. (2010) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.110.970889 · Cited by 1,050
Flowers, H. L., Silver, F. L., Fang, J., Rochon, E., & Martino, R. (2013) · Journal of Communication Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2013.04.001 · Cited by 249
Lee, H., Sullivan, S. J., & Schneiders, A. G. (2013) · Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport · doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2012.03.013 · Cited by 116
McFadden, P., & Crim, A. (2016) · Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions · doi:10.1097/ceh.0000000000000061 · Cited by 26
on behalf of the FAST-RIGHT Investigators and Coordinators, Li, S., Cui, L.-Y., Anderson, C., Gao, C., Yu, C., Shan, G., Wang, L., & Peng, B. (2019) · BMC Neurology · doi:10.1186/s12883-019-1480-6 · Cited by 11
Metadata
- Authors
- Harbison, J., Hossain, O., Jenkinson, D., Davis, J., Louw, S. J., & Ford, G. A.
- Venue
- Stroke
- Published
- 2003-01
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 71-76
- ISSN
- 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4628
- OpenAlex
- W2157420555
- Cited by
- 537
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Diagnostic Accuracy of Stroke Referrals From Primary Care, Emergency Room Physicians, and Ambulance Staff Using the Face Arm Speech Test. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.str.0000044170.46643.5e
- The paper
- Harbison, J., Hossain, O., Jenkinson, D., Davis, J., Louw, S. J., & Ford, G. A. (2003). Diagnostic Accuracy of Stroke Referrals From Primary Care, Emergency Room Physicians, and Ambulance Staff Using the Face Arm Speech Test. Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.0000044170.46643.5e
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.