Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35300252›Full record

ReviewEuropean stroke journal2022

Hyperacute prediction of functional outcome in spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ulrike Hammerbeck, Aziza Abdulle, Calvin Heal, Adrian R Parry-Jones

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European stroke journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. CT-Based deep learning platform combined with clinical parameters for predicting different discharge outcome in spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ulrike HammerbeckGeoffrey Jefferson Brain Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Northern Care Alliance & University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2657-4347
Aziza AbdulleDivision of Cardiovascular Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Calvin HealDivision of Cardiovascular Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Adrian R Parry-JonesGeoffrey Jefferson Brain Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Northern Care Alliance & University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To describe the association between factors routinely available in hyperacute care of spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) patients and functional outcome. Methods: We searched Medline, Embase and CINAHL in February 2020 for original studies reporting associations between markers available within six hours of arrival in hospital and modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at least 6 weeks post-ICH. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed where three or more studies were included. Findings: Thirty studies were included describing 40 markers. Ten markers underwent meta-analysis and age (OR = 1.06; 95%CI = 1.05 to 1.06; Conclusion: Multiple demographic, pre-morbid, clinical, imaging and laboratory factors should all be considered when prognosticating in hyperacute ICH. Incorporating these in to accurate and precise models will help to ensure appropriate levels of care for individual patients.

Indexed as

functional outcomeIntracerebral Haemorrhagepredictors

Identifiers

PMID35300252
PMCPMC8921779

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.