SynthesisJournal of medical systems2024
Maximising the Quality of Stroke Care: Reporting of Data Collection Methods and Resourcing in National Stroke Registries: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Journal of medical systems, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Stroke registries are tools for improving care and advancing research. We aim to describe the methodology and resourcing of existing national stroke registries. We conducted a systematic search of the published, peer-reviewed literature and grey literature examining descriptions of data collection methods and resourcing of national stroke registries published from 2012 to 2023. The systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023393841). 101 records relating to 21 registries in 19 countries were identified. They universally employed web-based platforms for data collection. The principal profession of data collectors was nursing. All included the acute phase of care, 28% (6) registered the pre-hospital (ambulance) phase and 14% (3) included rehabilitation. 80% (17) collected outcome data. The registries varied in their approach to outcome data collection; in 9 registries it was collected by hospitals, in 2 it was collected by the registry, and 7 had linkage to national administrative databases allowing follow-up of a limited number of end points. Coverage of the total number of strokes varies from 6 to 95%. Despite widespread use of Electronic Health Records (EHRs) the ability to automatically populate variables remained limited. Governance and management structures are diverse, making it challenging to compare their resourcing. Data collection for clinical registries requires time and necessary skills and imposes a significant administrative burden on the professionals entering data. We highlight the role of clinical registries as powerful instruments for quality improvement. Future work should involve creating a central repository of stroke registries to enable the development of new registries and facilitate international collaboration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39466451What 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.