ArticleJournal of neurosciences in rural practice
Knowledge of stroke and the window period for thrombolytic therapy in ischemic stroke among South Indians: A hospital-based survey with educational intervention.
Article in Journal of neurosciences in rural practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Time Lost Is Brain Lost: Insights into Acute Ischaemic Stroke Delays in a Tertiary Care Super-speciality Centre in Jharkhand.Annals of neurosciences · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The objective of this study was to determine the awareness of stroke in regards to the risk factors, warning symptoms, and knowledge of the therapeutic window period among varied strata of non-medical people attending a tertiary care center. Materials and Methods: The interventional study involved the collection of data regarding awareness of stroke using a structured questionnaire with a total score of 16. Pre-intervention assessment was followed by intervention in the form of education regarding awareness of stroke administered one-on-one for personalized and effective comprehension by subjects. Then, subjects were asked to recall the information that was delivered to them and were scored accordingly. Results: Among the 500 subjects included, 51% were female. About 76.8% of participants were young (age <50 years), and 83.4% were literate. Only 25.4% of participants were aware of the brain as the site of stroke. About 32.2% of candidates were aware of a few risk factors for stroke. Among them, the majority of participants were aware of hypertension (24%) as a risk factor. The most known warning symptom was "Numbness" or weakness of arm. The majority of the subjects (97.8%) were unaware of a therapeutic window period for stroke being 4.5 h or below. The mean pre-intervention score was 2.52 ± 1.65 while the mean post-intervention score was 15.10 ± 1.79 ( Conclusion: The study showed that even among literate participants, only a meager number of subjects were aware of the golden window period of intravenous thrombolysis. Educational intervention by means of an in-person and one-on-one explanation achieved significant levels of understanding of stroke. The study could be used to formulate large-scale educational programs that focus on spreading awareness of symptoms and risk factors while also instilling the importance of timely medical intervention for efficient thrombolytic therapy.
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.