ArticlePloS one2021
Prediction of recurrent stroke among ischemic stroke patients with atrial fibrillation: Development and validation of a risk score model.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- A study on risk factors of acute ischemic stroke after radiofrequency ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Recurrence of ischaemic stroke using epidemiology and neuroimaging: A retrospective study in Gansu Province.Heliyon · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is currently no validated risk prediction model for recurrent events among patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and atrial fibrillation (AF). Considering that the application of conventional risk scores has contextual limitations, new strategies are needed to develop such a model. Here, we set out to develop and validate a comprehensive risk prediction model for stroke recurrence in AIS patients with AF.
methodsAIS patients with AF were collected from multicenter registries in South Korea and Japan. A developmental dataset was constructed with 5648 registered cases from both countries for the period 2011‒2014. An external validation dataset was also created, consisting of Korean AIS subjects with AF registered between 2015 and 2018. Event outcomes were collected during 1 year after the index stroke. A multivariable prediction model was developed using the Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard model with non-stroke mortality as a competing risk. The model incorporated 21 clinical variables and was further validated, calibrated, and revised using the external validation dataset.
resultsThe developmental dataset consisted of 4483 Korean and 1165 Japanese patients (mean age, 74.3 ± 10.2 years; male 53%); 338 patients (6%) had recurrent stroke and 903 (16%) died. The clinical profiles of the external validation set (n = 3668) were comparable to those of the developmental dataset. The c-statistics of the final model was 0.68 (95% confidence interval, 0.66 ‒0.71). The developed prediction model did not show better discriminative ability for predicting stroke recurrence than the conventional risk prediction tools (CHADS2, CHA2DS2-VASc, and ATRIA).
conclusionsNeither conventional risk stratification tools nor our newly developed comprehensive prediction model using available clinical factors seemed to be suitable for identifying patients at high risk of recurrent ischemic stroke among AIS patients with AF in this modern direct oral anticoagulant era. Detailed individual information, including imaging, may be warranted to build a more robust and precise risk prediction model for stroke survivors with AF.
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.