Table 2.
Probability of finding different stroke subtypes based on the presence or absence of aphasia, visual field abnormalities, neglect and brachial predominance of weakness in a model including all TOAST patients without atrial fibrillation (comparison between predicted and actual values in the TOAST database)
| Predicted by model, % | Actual values, % | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No aphasia | ||||
| VF no | Negl. no | BP no (n = 529) | A (12), C (10), L (46) | A (13), C (9), L (45) |
| BP yes (n = 118) |
A (19), C (14), L (33) |
A (19), C (14), L (33) |
||
| Negl. yes | BP no (n = 48) | A (20), C (14), L (11) | A (15), C (19), L (13) | |
| BP yes (n = 35) | A (29), C (19), L (7) | A (20), C (29), L (6) | ||
| VF yes | Negl. no | BP no (n = 43) | A (12), C (12), L (19) | A (23), C (16), L (21) |
| BP yes (n = 7) |
A (19), C (17), L (12) |
A (14), C (14), L (0) |
||
| Negl. yes | BP no (n = 73) | A (19), C (17), L (3) | A (22), C (19), L (l) | |
| BP yes (n = 35) | A (29), C (23), L (2) | A (34), C (20), L (0) | ||
| Aphasia | ||||
| VF no | Negl. no | BP no (n = 140) | A (26), C (19), L (4) | A (31), C (19), L (4) |
| BP yes (n = 8) |
A (37), C (25), L (2) |
A (0), C (12), L (12) |
||
| Negl. yes | BP no (n = 39) | A (37), C (26), L (0.6) | A (38), C (23), L (3) | |
| BP yes (n = 5) | A (50), C (34), L (0.3) | A (60), C (0), L (0) | ||
| VF yes | Negl. no | BP no (n = 70) | A (25), C (23), L (1) | A (26), C (29), L (1) |
| BP yes (n = 3) |
A (36), C (30), L (0.6) |
A (0), C (0), L (0) |
||
| Negl. yes | BP no (n = 74) | A (39), C (31), L (0.2) | A (36), C (20), L (1) | |
| BP yes (n = 6) | A (50), C (39), L (0.1) | A (17), C (33), L (0) | ||
The subtype values do not add to 100% because those with undefined subtype are not shown. VF = Visual field deficit; Negl. = neglect; BP = brachial predominance; L = lacunar; A = atherothrombotic; C = cardioembolie.