Back

Red flags to screen for vertebral or carotid artery dissection in patients with neck pain or headache: a scoping review protocol

Feller, D.; De Zoete, A.; Maselli, F.; Mourad, F.; Chiarotto, A.; Koes, B.

2024-04-24 rehabilitation medicine and physical therapy
10.1101/2024.04.24.24306306 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundVertebral and carotid artery dissections may present as neck pain and/or headache in their early phases. Consequently, clinicians must screen for arterial dissections when assessing neck pain and/or headache patients. Considering that no secondary studies have been published on the red flags to screen for arterial dissections in patients with neck pain/headache, our scoping review will aim to gain a comprehensive understanding of the existing literature on patients with a carotid or vertebral artery dissection presenting with a primary complaint of neck pain and/or headache regarding the prevalence of associated signs and symptoms (e.g., neurological impairments and visual problems), the pain characteristics (e.g., intensity and localization), the demographic characteristics (e.g., gender and age), the prevalence of risk factors (e.g., cardiovascular), the mechanism of onset, and other relevant clinical predictors (e.g., comorbidities). MethodsWe will search MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, CINHAL, and Scopus. In addition, we will use Web of Science to implement backward and forward citation tracking strategies. We will include any primary study design (e.g., case-control studies, case reports and case series, and cohort studies) written in English, Dutch, or Italian without any time restriction. To be included, studied had to focus on adult patients (> 18 years of age) of any gender with a diagnosis of vertebral or artery dissection and with a primary complaint of neck pain and/or headache, with a reporting on other signs/symptoms, pain characteristics, demographic information, risk factors, or onset mechanisms. Two authors will independently perform the study selection and data extraction phases. Results from the scoping review will be summarized descriptively through tables and diagrams. As a scoping review, we will highlight any gaps in the existing literature regarding our research questions.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.