Trial reportInternational journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society2013
Mortality and causes of death in the Familial Intracranial Aneurysm study.
Trial report in International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- On the optimal choice of a hyperelastic model of ruptured and unruptured cerebral aneurysm.Scientific reports · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHigher mortality for patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage has been reported.
aimsIn families with intracranial aneurysms, we sought to determine whether mortality among subjects with intracranial aneurysm (affected) was higher and related to rupture, compared with unaffected family members.
methodsSubjects enrolled in the Familial Intracranial Aneurysm protocol were contacted yearly and their status was obtained. If reported to be deceased, the cause of death was verified by available records. A Cox proportional hazards model was utilized to compare mortality rates.
resultsOf the 2794 subjects, 1073 were affected and 1721 were unaffected. There were 8525 person-years of follow-up (mean 3·05 ± 1·73 years) and 85 deaths. Age at study entry for the affected (58·4 ± 11·9 years) was significantly older (P < 0·0001) than for the unaffected (52·2 ± 16·1). After adjusting for age, the overall mortality rate for the affected subjects was not significantly different from that for the unaffected (Rate Ratio [RR] 1·26, 95% confidence interval 0·82-1·93, P = 0·292). There was a strong effect modification due to age. The mortality rate ratio of the affected to the unaffected who were ≤60 years of age was RR = 3·48 (95% confidence interval: 1·59-7·63, P = 0·002), the rate for the affected subjects who were ≥60 was less than the rate for the unaffected (RR = 0·69, 95% confidence interval: 0·404-1·19, P = 0·178). The affected who had ruptures had 2·62 times the mortality rate as those without ruptures (95% confidence interval 1·43-4·80, P = 0·002).
conclusionThe overall mortality was similar for the affected and unaffected subjects in this cohort. Among the affected only, those with ruptured intracranial aneurysm had a higher mortality rate than those without ruptured.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.