Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26252207›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2015

Hypercoagulability Is a Stronger Risk Factor for Ischaemic Stroke than for Myocardial Infarction: A Systematic Review.

Alberto Maino, Frits R Rosendaal, Ale Algra, Flora Peyvandi, Bob Siegerink

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Strategies for Therapeutic Amelioration of Aberrant Plasma ZnInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Preceding infection and risk of stroke: An old concept revived by the COVID-19 pandemic.International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2020
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  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

5 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Alberto MainoDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; Angelo Bianchi Bonomi Hemophilia and Thrombosis Center, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Department of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Frits R RosendaalDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; Einthoven Laboratory for Experimental Vascular Medicine, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; Department of Thrombosis and Hemostasis, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Ale AlgraDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; Brain Center Rudolph Magnus, Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands; Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Flora PeyvandiAngelo Bianchi Bonomi Hemophilia and Thrombosis Center, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Department of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Bob SiegerinkDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; Einthoven Laboratory for Experimental Vascular Medicine, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; Center for Stroke Research Berlin, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEFondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico · ITLeiden University Medical Center · NLUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NLUniversity of Milan · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeHypercoagulability increases the risk of arterial thrombosis; however, this effect may differ between various manifestations of arterial disease.

methodsIn this study, we compared the effect of coagulation factors as measures of hypercoagulability on the risk of ischaemic stroke (IS) and myocardial infarction (MI) by performing a systematic review of the literature. The effect of a risk factor on IS (relative risk for IS, RRIS) was compared with the effect on MI (RRMI) by calculating their ratio (RRR = RRIS/RRMI). A relevant differential effect was considered when RRR was >1+ its own standard error (SE) or <1-SE.

resultsWe identified 70 publications, describing results from 31 study populations, accounting for 351 markers of hypercoagulability. The majority (203/351, 58%) had an RRR greater than 1. A larger effect on IS risk than MI risk (RRE>1+1SE) was found in 49/343 (14%) markers. Of these, 18/49 (37%) had an RRR greater than 1+2SE. On the opposite side, a larger effect on MI risk (RRR<1-1SE) was found in only 17/343 (5%) markers.

conclusionsThese results suggest that hypercoagulability has a more pronounced effect on the risk of IS than that of MI.

Indexed as

BiomarkersBrain IschemiaHumansMyocardial InfarctionRisk FactorsStrokeThrombophiliaThrombosisBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID26252207
PMCPMC4529149
OpenAlexW1895839389

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.