ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2024
Thrombolytic Treatment in Wake-Up Stroke: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Treatment Effectiveness in the Norwegian Stroke Registry.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2024. 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.
- Identifying wakeup stroke routine treatments in the emergency departments.Frontiers in stroke · 2026Article
- Survival after wake-up stroke and unknown-onset stroke-a nationwide observational study from the Norwegian Stroke Registry.European stroke journal · 2026Observational
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious clinical trials found improved outcome of thrombolytic treatment in patients with ischemic wake-up stroke (WUS) selected by advanced imaging techniques. The authors assessed the effectiveness of thrombolytic treatment in patients with WUS in a nationwide stroke registry. METHODS AND
resultsUsing propensity score matching, the authors assessed the effectiveness and safety of thrombolytic treatment versus no thrombolytic treatment in 726 patients (363 matched pairs) with WUS in the Norwegian Stroke Registry in 2014 to 2019. Thrombolytic treatment in WUS versus known-onset stroke was compared in 730 patients (365 matched pairs). Functional outcomes were assessed by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 3 months. A significant benefit of thrombolytic treatment in WUS was seen in ordinal analysis (odds ratio [OR], 1.48 [95% CI, 1.15-1.91];
conclusionsThrombolytic treatment in patients with WUS was associated with improved functional outcome compared with patients with no thrombolytic treatment and was not associated with increased rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage compared with known-onset stroke. The results indicate that thrombolytic treatment is effective and safe in WUS in a real-life setting.
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.