Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 171

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Metrics for Measuring Quality of Care in Comprehensive Stroke Centers: Detailed Follow-Up to Brain Attack Coalition Comprehensive Stroke Center Recommendations: A Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association

Open access
Leifer, Dana, Bravata, Dawn M., Connors, J.J. (Buddy), Hinchey, Judith A., Jauch, Edward C., Johnston, S. Claiborne, Latchaw, Richard, Likosky, William, Ogilvy, Christopher, Qureshi, Adnan I., Summers, Debbie, Sung, Gene Y., Williams, Linda S., Zorowitz, Richard·2011·Stroke

Abstract

Background—: Stroke is a major cause of disability and death. The Brain Attack Coalition has proposed establishment of primary and comprehensive stroke centers to provide appropriate care to stroke patients who require basic and more advanced interventions, respectively. Primary stroke centers have been designated by The Joint Commission since 2003, as well as by various states. The designation of comprehensive stroke centers (CSCs) is now being considered. To assist in this process, we propose a set of metrics and related data that CSCs should track to monitor the quality of care that they provide and to facilitate quality improvement. Methods and Results—: We analyzed available guideline statements, reviews, and other literature to identify the major features that distinguish CSCs from primary stroke centers, drafted a set of metrics and related data elements to measure the key components of these aspects of stroke care, and then revised these through an iterative process to reach a consensus. We propose a set of metrics and related data elements that cover the major aspects of specialized care for patients with ischemic cerebrovascular disease and nontraumatic subarachnoid and intracerebral hemorrhages at CSCs. Conclusions—: The metrics that we propose are intended to provide a framework for standardized data collection at CSCs to facilitate local quality improvement efforts and to allow for analysis of pooled data from different CSCs that may lead to development of national performance standards for CSCs in the future.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/str.0b013e318208eb99

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 9 references

Metadata

Authors
Leifer, D., Bravata, D. M., Connors, J. J. (., Hinchey, J. A., Jauch, E. C., Johnston, S. C., Latchaw, R., Likosky, W., Ogilvy, C., Qureshi, A. I., Summers, D., Sung, G. Y., Williams, L. S., & Zorowitz, R.
Venue
Stroke
Published
2011-03
Volume
42
Issue
3
Pages
849-877
ISSN
  • 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4628
OpenAlex
W2133355726
Cited by
171
References
9
FWCI
17.29
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: Metrics for Measuring Quality of Care in Comprehensive Stroke Centers: Detailed Follow-Up to Brain Attack Coalition Comprehensive Stroke Center Recommendations: A Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/str.0b013e318208eb99
The paper
Leifer, D., Bravata, D. M., Connors, J. J. (., Hinchey, J. A., Jauch, E. C., Johnston, S. C., Latchaw, R., Likosky, W., Ogilvy, C., Qureshi, A. I., Summers, D., Sung, G. Y., Williams, L. S., & Zorowitz, R. (2011). Metrics for Measuring Quality of Care in Comprehensive Stroke Centers: Detailed Follow-Up to Brain Attack Coalition Comprehensive Stroke Center Recommendations: A Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/str.0b013e318208eb99

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.