Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20697424›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Neurology2010

Secondary stroke prevention.

J David Spence

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Neurology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Controlling resistant hypertension.Stroke and vascular neurology · 2018
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 2 countries.

J David SpenceStroke Prevention and Atherosclerosis Research Center, 1400 Western Road, London, ON N6G 2V2, Canada. dspence@robarts.ca
Thrombosis and Atherosclerosis Research Institute · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Secondary stroke prevention can reduce the risk of recurrent stroke by approximately 90%. To achieve such a reduction, early implementation of preventative measures and administration of therapy appropriate to the underlying cause of the presenting transient ischemic attack or stroke are crucial. Smoking cessation and a Cretan Mediterranean diet are each more effective than any single medication in reducing the risk of recurrent stroke. Control of resistant hypertension can markedly reduce the risk of intracerebral hemorrhage and lacunar infarction but might require therapy that is specific to the underlying cause. New antiplatelet agents have been developed or are in development that might avoid the issues of resistance and drug interactions that prevail with established agents of this type. Furthermore, new anticoagulants in development offer promise of replacing warfarin, and devices to occlude the atrial appendage are on the horizon for patients with atrial fibrillation. Carotid endarterectomy is appropriate for severe symptomatic carotid stenosis, while stenting might be appropriate for symptomatic stenosis where the surgical risk is high. Most patients with asymptomatic stenosis, however, should be treated with medical therapy, unless indicators of high stroke risk are present. In this narrative Review, I discuss recent advances in secondary stroke prevention.

Indexed as

Diet, MediterraneanRisk Reduction BehaviorAnimalsHumansHypertensionRisk FactorsSecondary PreventionSmoking CessationStroke

Identifiers

PMID20697424
OpenAlexW2036257514

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.