ArticleBMC family practice2013
Survival of stroke patients after introduction of the 'Dutch Transmural Protocol TIA/CVA'.
Article in BMC family practice, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stroke follow-up in primary care: a prospective cohort study on guideline adherence.BMC family practice · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarlier research showed that healthcare in stroke could be better organized, aiming for improved survival and less comorbidity. Therefore, in 2004 the Dutch College of General Practitioners (NHG) and the Dutch Association of Neurology (NVN) introduced the 'Dutch Transmural Protocol TIA/CVA' (the LTA) to improve survival, minimize the risk of stroke recurrence, and increase quality of life after stroke. This study examines whether survival improved after implementation of the new protocol, and whether there was an increase in contacts with the general practitioner (GP)/nurse practitioner, registration of comorbidity and prescription of medication.
methodsFrom the primary care database of the Registration Network Groningen (RNG) two cohorts were composed: one cohort compiled before and one after introduction of the LTA. Cohort 1 (n = 131, first stroke 2001-2002) was compared with cohort 2 (n = 132, first stroke 2005-2006) with regard to survival and the secondary outcomes.
resultsComparison of the two cohorts showed no significant improvement in survival. In cohort 2, the number of contacts with the GP was significantly lower and with the nurse practitioner significantly higher, compared with cohort 1. All risk factors for stroke were more prevalent in cohort 2, but were only significant for hypercholesterolemia. In both cohorts more medication was prescribed after stroke, whereas ACE inhibitors were prescribed more frequently only in cohort 2.
conclusionNo major changes in survival and secondary outcomes were apparent after introduction of the LTA. Although, there was a small improvement in secondary prevention, this study shows that optimal treatment after introduction of the LTA has not yet been achieved.
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.