ArticlePloS one2017
Incidence and relative risk of stroke in the diabetic and the non-diabetic population between 1998 and 2014: A community-based stroke register.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidence of Stroke in People With Diabetes Compared to Those Without Diabetes: A Systematic Review.Experimental and clinical endocrinology & diabetes : official journal, German Society of Endocrinology [and] German Diabetes Association · 2023Pooled it
- Younger age of stroke in low-middle income countries is related to healthcare access and quality.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Post-stroke Rehabilitation of Severe Upper Limb Paresis in Germany - Toward Long-Term Treatment With Brain-Computer Interfaces.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Review
- Impact of Diabetes on Complications, Long Term Mortality and Recurrence in 608,890 Hospitalised Patients with Stroke.Global heart · 2020Article
- Article
- Social inequality and diabetes mellitus - developments over time among the adult population in Germany.Journal of health monitoring · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
One major objective of the St. Vincent Declaration was to reduce excess risk of stroke in people with diabetes mellitus. The aim of this study is to estimate the trend of incidence and relative risk of stroke in the diabetic and the non-diabetic populations in Germany over a 17-year period. We estimated age-sex standardised incidence rates of all stroke and ischaemic stroke in people with and without diabetes based on an ongoing prospective community-based stroke register covering 105,000 inhabitants. Time trends were analysed using Poisson regression. In total, 3,111 individuals (diabetes: 28.4%, men 46.9%, mean age 73.1 years (SD 13.2)) had a first stroke, 84.9% of which were ischaemic stroke. Among people with diabetes we observed a significant reduction in all stroke incidence by 1.5% per year (relative risk: 0.985; 95% confidence interval 0.972-0.9995) Likewise, this incidence tended to decrease for ischaemic stroke by 1% per year (0.993; 0.979-1.008). In contrast, the incidence rate for all stroke remained nearly stable among people without diabetes (1.003; 0.993-1.013) and for ischaemic stroke (1.002; 0.991-1.013). The relative risk comparing diabetic and non-diabetic population decreased for all stroke (two percent annual reduction) but not for ischaemic stroke. Time trends were similar for both sexes regarding all and ischaemic strokes. We found a reduction in risk of stroke in the diabetic population while this rate did not materially change in the non-diabetic population.
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.