Registration for a live webinar on 'Innovative Vaccines and Viral Pathogenesis: Insights from Recent Monkeypox (Mpox) Research' is now open.
See webinar detailsWe noted you are experiencing viewing problems
-
Check with your IT department that JWPlatform, JWPlayer and Amazon AWS & CloudFront are not being blocked by your network. The relevant domains are *.jwplatform.com, *.jwpsrv.com, *.jwpcdn.com, jwpltx.com, jwpsrv.a.ssl.fastly.net, *.amazonaws.com and *.cloudfront.net. The relevant ports are 80 and 443.
-
Check the following talk links to see which ones work correctly:
Auto Mode
HTTP Progressive Download Send us your results from the above test links at access@hstalks.com and we will contact you with further advice on troubleshooting your viewing problems. -
No luck yet? More tips for troubleshooting viewing issues
-
Contact HST Support access@hstalks.com
-
Please review our troubleshooting guide for tips and advice on resolving your viewing problems.
-
For additional help, please don't hesitate to contact HST support access@hstalks.com
We hope you have enjoyed this limited-length demo
This is a limited length demo talk; you may
login or
review methods of
obtaining more access.
Printable Handouts
Navigable Slide Index
- Introduction
- Goals
- Definitions
- Bayes theorem
- Spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage
- Bayesian approach
- Pretest probability SAH in headache
- Actionable clinical data to adjust pretest - positive
- Actionable clinical data to adjust pretest - negative
- Bayesian pretest inferences
- Testing: CT brain non-contrasted
- Fagan nomogram CT <6 hours
- Fagan nomogram CT >6 hours
- Who still needs an LP?
- Ottawa subarachnoid hemorrhage rule
- Options & decisions
Topics Covered
- Bayes theorem
- Spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage
- Bayesian approach
- Pretest probability SAH in headache
- Actionable clinical data to adjust pretest
- Bayesian pretest inferences
- Fagan nomogram CT before/after 6 hours
- Who still needs an LP?
- Ottawa subarachnoid hemorrhage rule
Talk Citation
Bedolla, J. (2018, March 29). Subarachnoid hemorrhage - a Bayesian approach to a neurological black swan [Video file]. In The Biomedical & Life Sciences Collection, Henry Stewart Talks. Retrieved November 21, 2024, from https://doi.org/10.69645/QSAX5908.Export Citation (RIS)
Publication History
Financial Disclosures
- Dr. John Bedolla has not informed HSTalks of any commercial/financial relationship that it is appropriate to disclose.
A selection of talks on Clinical Practice
Transcript
Please wait while the transcript is being prepared...
0:00
Hello. Today's talk is on "Subarachnoid Hemorrhage:
A Bayesian Approach to a Neurological Black Swan".
I'm Dr John Bedolla.
I'm an Assistant Professor and Assistant Director of
Research at the University of Texas Dell Medical School.
I'm also the National Director of Risk for
a national emergency medicine company called US Acute Care Solutions.
If you have any questions, please contact me at jbedollamd@austin.utexas.edu.
0:28
The goals of my talk today are the following:
explain Bayes theorem and apply it in medical reasoning,
apply Bayes theorem to estimate the probability of
a spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage in patients presenting with acute headache,
and use Bayesian inference to inform risk benefit analysis of testing for
subarachnoid hemorrhage and to decide who needs
a lumbar puncture to rule out the subarachnoid hemorrhage when the CT is negative.
0:53
Let's start off with some definitions.
The definition of Bayes theorem,
which is named after Thomas Bayes (1701-1761) is,
the probability of an event when factors that are
positively or negatively associated with that event are known.
A Black Swan, after Nassim Taleb, is
a rare catastrophic unpredictable event that in retrospect looks very predictable.
Large scale examples of this are 9/11,
the stock market crash of 1987.
Medical Black Swans are rare catastrophic diseases that present atypically.
I'll be using these terms, so I want to define it now.
Likelihood ratio positive, so this is
a statistical term that can be used in Bayes theorem analysis,
and what it means is that given a particular factor is positive,
how much more likely is it that a condition
you're trying to diagnose or exclude is present?
Likelihood ratio negative, given a particular factor is negative,
how much less likely is it that
the condition you're trying to diagnose or exclude is present?
Pre-test probability is something similar to prevalence.
It's the probability that a patient has a condition you're
trying to diagnose or exclude before you do any testing.
This is similar to the concept of prevalence.
Post-test probability, this is the probability that the patient has
a condition you are trying to diagnose or exclude after you get a test result.
So, pre-test is before you do the testing,
post-test is after you do the testing.
Hide