Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLansky, AJen_US
dc.contributor.authorMessé, SRen_US
dc.contributor.authorBrickman, AMen_US
dc.contributor.authorDwyer, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorvan der Worp, HBen_US
dc.contributor.authorLazar, RMen_US
dc.contributor.authorPietras, CGen_US
dc.contributor.authorAbrams, KJen_US
dc.contributor.authorMcFadden, Een_US
dc.contributor.authorPetersen, NHen_US
dc.contributor.authorBrowndyke, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorPrendergast, Ben_US
dc.contributor.authorNg, VGen_US
dc.contributor.authorCutlip, DEen_US
dc.contributor.authorKapadia, Sen_US
dc.contributor.authorKrucoff, MWen_US
dc.contributor.authorLinke, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorMoy, CSen_US
dc.contributor.authorSchofer, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorvan Es, G-Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorVirmani, Ren_US
dc.contributor.authorPopma, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorParides, MKen_US
dc.contributor.authorKodali, Sen_US
dc.contributor.authorBilello, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorZivadinov, Ren_US
dc.contributor.authorAkar, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorFurie, KLen_US
dc.contributor.authorGress, Den_US
dc.contributor.authorVoros, Sen_US
dc.contributor.authorMoses, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorGreer, Den_US
dc.contributor.authorForrest, JKen_US
dc.contributor.authorHolmes, Den_US
dc.contributor.authorKappetein, APen_US
dc.contributor.authorMack, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorBaumbach, Aen_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-08-10T13:38:44Z
dc.date.available2020-08-10T13:38:44Z
dc.date.issued2017-02en_US
dc.identifier.issn0735-1097en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/handle/123456789/66159
dc.description.abstractSurgical and catheter-based cardiovascular procedures and adjunctive pharmacology have an inherent risk of neurological complications. The current diversity of neurological endpoint definitions and ascertainment methods in clinical trials has led to uncertainties in the neurological risk attributable to cardiovascular procedures and inconsistent evaluation of therapies intended to prevent or mitigate neurological injury. Benefit-risk assessment of such procedures should be on the basis of an evaluation of well-defined neurological outcomes that are ascertained with consistent methods and capture the full spectrum of neurovascular injury and its clinical effect. The Neurologic Academic Research Consortium is an international collaboration intended to establish consensus on the definition, classification, and assessment of neurological endpoints applicable to clinical trials of a broad range of cardiovascular interventions. Systematic application of the proposed definitions and assessments will improve our ability to evaluate the risks of cardiovascular procedures and the safety and effectiveness of preventive therapies.en_US
dc.format.extent679 - 691en_US
dc.format.mediumPrinten_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of the American College of Cardiologyen_US
dc.subjectHumansen_US
dc.subjectNervous System Diseasesen_US
dc.subjectCardiovascular Diseasesen_US
dc.subjectEndpoint Determinationen_US
dc.subjectResearch Designen_US
dc.subjectClinical Trials as Topicen_US
dc.titleProposed Standardized Neurological Endpoints for Cardiovascular Clinical Trials: An Academic Research Consortium Initiative.en_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jacc.2016.11.045en_US
pubs.issue6en_US
pubs.notesNot knownen_US
pubs.publication-statusPublisheden_US
pubs.volume69en_US


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record