Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25157064›Full record

SynthesisCMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne2014

Cognitive impairment and risk of future stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Meng Lee, Jeffrey L Saver, Keun-Sik Hong, Yi-Ling Wu, Hsing-Cheng Liu, Neal M Rao, Bruce Ovbiagele

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

7 authors.

Meng LeeDepartment of Neurology (Lee, Wu), Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chiayi, Taiwan; Stroke Center and Department of Neurology (Saver, Rao), Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles; Department of Neurology (Hong), Ilsan Paik Hospital, Inje University, Gimhae, South Korea; Department of Psychiatry (Liu), Taipei City Hospital Song-Te Branch, Taipei, Taiwan; Department of Neurosciences (Ovbiagele), Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC.
Jeffrey L SaverDepartment of Neurology (Lee, Wu), Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chiayi, Taiwan; Stroke Center and Department of Neurology (Saver, Rao), Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles; Department of Neurology (Hong), Ilsan Paik Hospital, Inje University, Gimhae, South Korea; Department of Psychiatry (Liu), Taipei City Hospital Song-Te Branch, Taipei, Taiwan; Department of Neurosciences (Ovbiagele), Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC.
Keun-Sik HongDepartment of Neurology (Lee, Wu), Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chiayi, Taiwan; Stroke Center and Department of Neurology (Saver, Rao), Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles; Department of Neurology (Hong), Ilsan Paik Hospital, Inje University, Gimhae, South Korea; Department of Psychiatry (Liu), Taipei City Hospital Song-Te Branch, Taipei, Taiwan; Department of Neurosciences (Ovbiagele), Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC.
Yi-Ling WuDepartment of Neurology (Lee, Wu), Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chiayi, Taiwan; Stroke Center and Department of Neurology (Saver, Rao), Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles; Department of Neurology (Hong), Ilsan Paik Hospital, Inje University, Gimhae, South Korea; Department of Psychiatry (Liu), Taipei City Hospital Song-Te Branch, Taipei, Taiwan; Department of Neurosciences (Ovbiagele), Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC.
Hsing-Cheng LiuDepartment of Neurology (Lee, Wu), Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chiayi, Taiwan; Stroke Center and Department of Neurology (Saver, Rao), Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles; Department of Neurology (Hong), Ilsan Paik Hospital, Inje University, Gimhae, South Korea; Department of Psychiatry (Liu), Taipei City Hospital Song-Te Branch, Taipei, Taiwan; Department of Neurosciences (Ovbiagele), Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC.
Neal M RaoDepartment of Neurology (Lee, Wu), Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chiayi, Taiwan; Stroke Center and Department of Neurology (Saver, Rao), Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles; Department of Neurology (Hong), Ilsan Paik Hospital, Inje University, Gimhae, South Korea; Department of Psychiatry (Liu), Taipei City Hospital Song-Te Branch, Taipei, Taiwan; Department of Neurosciences (Ovbiagele), Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC.
Bruce OvbiageleDepartment of Neurology (Lee, Wu), Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chiayi, Taiwan; Stroke Center and Department of Neurology (Saver, Rao), Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles; Department of Neurology (Hong), Ilsan Paik Hospital, Inje University, Gimhae, South Korea; Department of Psychiatry (Liu), Taipei City Hospital Song-Te Branch, Taipei, Taiwan; Department of Neurosciences (Ovbiagele), Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC ovibes@musc.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSeveral studies have assessed the link between cognitive impairment and risk of future stroke, but results have been inconsistent. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies to determine the association between cognitive impairment and risk of future stroke.

methodsWe searched MEDLINE and Embase (1966 to November 2013) and conducted a manual search of bibliographies of relevant retrieved articles and reviews. We included cohort studies that reported multivariable adjusted relative risks and 95% confidence intervals or standard errors for stroke with respect to baseline cognitive impairment.

resultsWe identified 18 cohort studies (total 121 879 participants) and 7799 stroke events. Pooled analysis of results from all studies showed that stroke risk increased among patients with cognitive impairment at baseline (relative risk [RR] 1.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.24-1.56). The results were similar when we restricted the analysis to studies that used a widely adopted definition of cognitive impairment (i.e., Mini-Mental State Examination score < 25 or nearest equivalent) (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.46-1.84). Cognitive impairment at baseline was also associated with an increased risk of fatal stroke (RR 1.68, 95% CI 1.21-2.33) and ischemic stroke (RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.41-1.93).

interpretationBaseline cognitive impairment was associated with a significantly higher risk of future stroke, especially ischemic and fatal stroke.

Indexed as

Cognitive DysfunctionHumansRisk FactorsStroke

Identifiers

PMID25157064
PMCPMC4188684

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.