Trial reportBMC gastroenterology2014
Risk score to predict gastrointestinal bleeding after acute ischemic stroke.
Trial report in BMC gastroenterology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prediction Model Incorporating Infarct Localization for Stress Ulcer Risk Stratification in Acute Ischemic Stroke.Neurocritical care · 2026Article
- Does a History of Stroke Affect Outcomes in Non-variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding?Cureus · 2025Article
- Observational
- Association and temporal sequence of pneumonia and gastrointestinal bleeding after acute ischemic stroke.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Article
- Review
- Association of Proton Pump Inhibitor Prophylaxis on Clinical Outcome in Acute Ischemic Stroke in China: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Predictive Modeling of Short-Term Poor Prognosis of Successful Reperfusion after Endovascular Treatment in Patients with Anterior Circulation Acute Ischemic Stroke.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2022Article
- Peripheral Organ Injury After Stroke.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Review
- Overt gastrointestinal bleeding following haploidentical haematopoietic stem cell transplantation: incidence, outcomes and predictive models.Bone marrow transplantation · 2021Article
- Gastrointestinal bleeding during acute ischaemic stroke hospitalisation increases the risk of stroke recurrence.Stroke and vascular neurology · 2020Article
- Factors affecting the occurrence of gastrointestinal bleeding in acute ischemic stroke patients.Medicine · 2019Article
- Endoscopy Is Relatively Safe in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke and Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2019Article
- Observational
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 at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is a common and often serious complication after stroke. Although several risk factors for post-stroke GIB have been identified, no reliable or validated scoring system is currently available to predict GIB after acute stroke in routine clinical practice or clinical trials. In the present study, we aimed to develop and validate a risk model (acute ischemic stroke associated gastrointestinal bleeding score, the AIS-GIB score) to predict in-hospital GIB after acute ischemic stroke.
methodsThe AIS-GIB score was developed from data in the China National Stroke Registry (CNSR). Eligible patients in the CNSR were randomly divided into derivation (60%) and internal validation (40%) cohorts. External validation was performed using data from the prospective Chinese Intracranial Atherosclerosis Study (CICAS). Independent predictors of in-hospital GIB were obtained using multivariable logistic regression in the derivation cohort, and β-coefficients were used to generate point scoring system for the AIS-GIB. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test were used to assess model discrimination and calibration, respectively.
resultsA total of 8,820, 5,882, and 2,938 patients were enrolled in the derivation, internal validation and external validation cohorts. The overall in-hospital GIB after AIS was 2.6%, 2.3%, and 1.5% in the derivation, internal, and external validation cohort, respectively. An 18-point AIS-GIB score was developed from the set of independent predictors of GIB including age, gender, history of hypertension, hepatic cirrhosis, peptic ulcer or previous GIB, pre-stroke dependence, admission National Institutes of Health stroke scale score, Glasgow Coma Scale score and stroke subtype (Oxfordshire). The AIS-GIB score showed good discrimination in the derivation (0.79; 95% CI, 0.764-0.825), internal (0.78; 95% CI, 0.74-0.82) and external (0.76; 95% CI, 0.71-0.82) validation cohorts. The AIS-GIB score was well calibrated in the derivation (P = 0.42), internal (P = 0.45) and external (P = 0.86) validation cohorts.
conclusionThe AIS-GIB score is a valid clinical grading scale to predict in-hospital GIB after AIS. Further studies on the effect of the AIS-GIB score on reducing GIB and improving outcome after AIS are warranted.
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.