Talk:Cerebrovascular disease/Archive 1

good

good to see that this article is tagged. Aside from the poor grammar there are many confused and untrue statements made. While I lack the expertise to properly ammend the article, I know enough to know it is not right. Thanks for the continued quality control! ~K.M.

Yes this article is full of factual errors. Should not be here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.250.21 (talk) 20:46, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

How did this article find its way here? Publishing materials such as this will seriously damage the credibility of your encyclopedia as a veritable source of information. Please remove asap. Dr Okpani A I [Nigeria] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.78.57.162 (talk) 19:53, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Ha, yea who wrote this? Despite it's faults I still think its better than nothing though. Who wants to fix it?Repapetilto (talk) 01:46, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Work Plan

Cerebrovascular disease is a relatively broad topic as it includes ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, aneurysms, AVMs, genetic disorders, and carotid stenosis among many other diseases. This article provides a brief overview of the different types of strokes and some pathophysiology of stroke, but it does not go into detail of other diseases that are included into the broad category of cerebrovascular disease. This article also does not provide a good overview of the diagnostic steps for evaluating cerebrovascular disease nor does it explain treatment in great detail. Therefore, my plan is to:
- discuss the most common diseases incorporated into the category of cerebrovascular disease (aneurysms, AVMs, genetic disorders, etc) and explain their epidemiology and risk factors

- list other rare disorders that are included in the cerebrovascular disease umbrella
- explain steps in diagnosing and differentiating types of cerebrovascular diseases
- detail the treatment options for the different types of cerebrovascular diseases
- discuss more in depth the ways to prevent cerebrovascular disease

I intend to use books in clinicalkey and accessmedicine for background information on the different types of cerebrovascular disease.
I will use the CDC and WHO websites for epidemiology and risk factors.
I will use National Guideline Clearinghouse and UpToDate for guidelines associated with diagnosing and treating cerebrovascular disease.
I will embed relevant Wiki pages that will provide additional resource for more in-depth discussion of the different types of cerebrovascular disease.
I will avoid excess jargon or when I must use a medical term, I will describe it in lay terms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nguyencj (talk • contribs) 20:33, 20 November 2017 (UTC) --Nguyencj (talk) 20:37, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

very good ideas--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 21:35, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

I have rewritten the introduction to discuss other etiologies of cerebrovascular disease besides stroke and added clarification. I will add example images of different cerebrovascular diseases. I also plan to explain diagnosis and treatment in more depth in the near future.--Nguyencj (talk) 03:18, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

I noticed your additions to the article. Remember to explain medical terms like aphasia and ataxia. AngeladMD (talk) 14:30, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestions. I have added clarification and links to other wikipedia pages explaining the terms --Nguyencj (talk) 17:08, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Nguyencj great additions to the article.

You did a great job with the information in the signs and symptoms portion. I might recommend adding another sentence after this: "This includes either an ischemic stroke, where areas of the brain are not well-perfused due to an obstruction or decreased blood flow, or a hemorrhagic stroke, where there is bleeding into or around the brain due to damaged blood vessels." A sentence that better details what occurs with ischemia v. hemorrhage. These are pretty important distinctions when considering cerebrovascular disease, and the separation of these into two sentences may help the reader better see them as distinct entities. You might also consider adding another citation within the first three sentences of the paragraph to ensure full citation.

I like the division of causes into the sections of congenital, acquired and idiopathic. This is a very logical division, and helps the reader section off an otherwise cumbersome section. My only recommendation for this section would be to title this section (or the types of stroke) section Pathophysiology, in order to better adhere to the guidelines of WP:MEDMOS. In the types of stroke division, I might also consider putting SAH under the title of hemorrhagic stroke in order to be consistent with your previous statements and a little more accurate.

You put a ton of work into the congenital section. My only recommendation here is to make sure to add a few more citations in some of the sentences to ensure the information is accurately attributed to published work. Same sentiment for idiopathic.

Overall, great work and good use of appropriate resources!! Sarahguess5 (talk) 23:07, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. --Nguyencj (talk) 21:12, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Great work, also would like to add, no concern for the author trying to speak to any particular bias. The perspectives are balanced and present all information. Sarahguess5 (talk) 19:02, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

• [1]well done--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 21:46, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

No co relation with diabetes and acute cerebrovascular disease (Stroke)

1. Total number of hospital stays in usa 32,371,800..

2. Total number of hospital stays of diabetis as principal diagnosis 512,500. And diabetis is secondary diagnosis 6,290,000.

3. Acute cerebrovascular disease (stroke) patients with diabtis as principal or secondary diagnosis 153,800. Finally Cerebro vascular disease occurred 2.4% of diabetic people .

4. In this total number of hospital stays , 892300 patients for stayed in hospital for Acute cerebrovascular disease (stroke).2.4%

5. Final conclusion is Acute cerebrovascular disease occurred in same % in diabetic and non diabetic people.

6. There is no any co relation with diabetes and cerebrovascular disease

Statastical and Research Evidence : https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK56044/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK63493/

If any one want to revert this ,please provide valuable explanation. I am a medical doctor i was submitted this issue to world health organization got appreciation for information. I can provide some more reliable sources in this issue . stroke occurs in same percent in general people compare with diabetic people. Please read above links carefully can get for conclusion . Generally stroke occurs in old age people. Diabetes and hypertension are most common in old age people.For example if we verify 100 stroke peoples medical history ....more people suffer with diabetes and hypertension. due to this reason , many of them thought wrongfully .For example if we verify 100 general old patients records in hospital ....more people suffer with diabetes and hypertension....

IF ANY ONE WANT TO REVERT...START DISCUSSION I CAN PROVIDE SOME MORE RELIABLE SOURCES IN THIS CONCEPT .

(Subrahmanya preethamm (talk) 01:02, 30 May 2018 (UTC))

have left note on your talkpage, thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 01:54, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

You must mean "no correlation between diabetes and stroke"?

This 2018 Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis says "diabetes mellitus range HbA1c (≥6.5%) was associated with an increased risk of first-ever stroke with average HR (95% confidence interval) of 2.15 (1.76, 2.63)".

So yes there is definitely a correlation.

Why are we using books from 2004 and 2005? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:28, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanq Ozzie10aaaa! I will provide most recent statistical reports..I never believe reviews based on co-marbid.

Doc James ! Your objection is the sources from 2004 and 2005....its ok. The statistics based on total usa populations studies ....the studies confirms that "no correlation between diabetes and strokE". That means in 2004..2005 years diabetes have no co relation with Stoke.

Ok i will provide most recent statistics...2017 or 2018.

Already i previously explained most systemic reviews based on co-morbid presents with Stroke patients .Stroke occurs in old age people,these people have co-morbid diabetes and hypertension. Any systemic review must follow the total population based statistics. But it is not so easy thing to get medical records of total usa population.Due to this reason the reviews depends on co-morbid are mostly wrong.

I will provide 2017 statistical reports....

We have to get answer for following question ...by any systemic review

1. IN one lack non-diabetic persons how much percent suffered with Stroke?

2. IN one lack diabetic persons(Primary or secondary) how much percent suffered with Stroke?

If any systemic review give answers for my above 2 questions ...we can believe that review.

"This 2018 Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis" can give answer for above questions...we have to analyse in this discussion and come to conclusion.

(Subrahmanya preethamm (talk) 05:48, 30 May 2018 (UTC))

We do not re analysis the primary data. What we do is we allow the experts who are writing the systematic review to do that analysis and we paraphrase their conclusions. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:08, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Doc James  ! I am not opposing you ...but i am giving some more information about the co relation ship between Diabetes and Stroke I am a medical doctor …I am most comfort to treat diabetic patients. Recently I studied about incident of stroke in diabetic population. I am so shock/or surprised by watch this statistical health reports by usa government .

My observations with this statistics.

            1.	Total hospital discharges of general hospital discharges : 33 Million

            2.	Total stroke discharges from general hospital admissions :   .9 Million

Percentage of incidence of stroke in general hospital discharges : 2.70  %

            3.	Total hospital discharges of diabetes as primary or secondary diagnosis : 6.8 Millions

            4.	Total stroke discharges from diabetes as primary or secondary diagnosis :   .154 million

Percentage of incidence of  stroke in hospital discharges of diabetes as primary or secondary diagnosis : 2.26  %

Conclusion : Diabetes is not risk factor for Cerebra vascular disease. We have to get information the % incidents of stroke from diabetic or not diabetic people and compare. But Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis based on Admission records of stroke patients from various hospitals.But it is purely wrong process. Admission records of stroke patients clearly tells the diabetes is dominated disease in this patients. but even if we verify admission records of general people after age 60 years , these people also suffer predominately with diabetes and hypertension . I was submitted this information to world health organization ,I got appreciation reply from WHO.

Reference :

       https://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/projections/2016-01.pdf

       https://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports.jsp

       https://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb51.pdf

       https://hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb17.pdf  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subrahmanya preethamm (talk • contribs) 17:18, 31 May 2018 (UTC) 

       https://hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb93.pdf

(Subrahmanya preethamm (talk) 16:15, 31 May 2018 (UTC)) (Subrahmanya preethamm (talk) 00:27, 1 June 2018 (UTC))

We do not do our own analysis of primary data. We simple paraphrase high quality secondary sources. Do you have a high quality secondary source that says DM is not a risk factor for stroke? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:47, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

I understood you Doc James! I know the fact.I am regular follower of your articles and editing process. Your version is appreciable and perfect for Wikipedia .I have secondary sources...i am analyzing and submit you a high quality secondary sources shortly.

(Subrahmanya preethamm (talk) 08:46, 1 June 2018 (UTC))