ArticleJournal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis2025
Diagnostic Ability of Risk Models in the Field of Ischemic Stroke for Predicting Atherosclerotic Outcomes in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction.
Article in Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review focusing on how medical researchers report variables in risk scores or models to predict prognosis of patients after percutaneous coronary intervention.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Pooled it
- Risk Stratification in Cardiovascular Medicine for Prognostic Assessment and Therapeutic Decision-Making: From Atrial Fibrillation to the Broader Disease Spectrum.Journal of arrhythmia · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsSeveral risk-scoring models, including the Fukuoka Stroke Risk Score, Essen Stroke Risk Score, and Stroke Prognosis Instrument II, have been developed to predict recurrent cerebrovascular events in patients with ischemic stroke. As myocardial infarction (MI) and ischemic stroke are both atherosclerotic diseases, these scoring models in the field of cerebrovascular disease may be applicable and useful for risk stratification in patients with acute MI. We therefore evaluated the diagnostic ability and clinical applicability of these stroke risk scores in predicting atherosclerotic events after acute MI.
methodsThis multicenter retrospective study included 2016 patients with acute MI who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and survived to discharge. The three risk-scoring models were calculated, and their diagnostic ability for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) after discharge, a composite of cardiovascular death, recurrent MI, and ischemic stroke, was evaluated.
resultsDuring the median follow-up of 523 days, 218 (10.8%) patients experienced MACE after discharge. High values for Fukuoka Stroke Risk Score, Essen Stroke Risk Score, and Stroke Prognosis Instrument II were progressively associated with an increased risk of MACE after discharge. Overall, the diagnostic abilities of the three risk scores were similar.
conclusionsRisk prediction models in the field of ischemic stroke, including the Fukuoka Stroke Risk Score, Essen Stroke Risk Score, and Stroke Prognosis Instrument II, were useful in stratifying MACE risk in patients with acute MI. Risk-scoring models for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease may be applicable to patient populations with other cardiovascular diseases in different arterial territories.
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.