ArticleCyborg and bionic systems (Washington, D.C.)2025
Sex-Related Difference in Outcomes of Remote Ischemic Conditioning for Symptomatic Intracranial Atherosclerotic Stenosis.
Article in Cyborg and bionic systems (Washington, D.C.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Translational Barriers and Optimization Strategies for Remote Ischemic Conditioning to Enhance Stroke Cerebroprotection.Biomolecules · 2026Review
- Association of early-pregnancy platelet-to-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio with preeclampsia: a retrospective cohort study.American journal of clinical and experimental immunology · 2026Article
- Non-traditional lipid parameters are independent predictors of the location, distribution, and stroke events of moderate-to-severe intracranial and extracranial atherosclerotic stenosis.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) is a novel and promising therapeutic intervention for symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (sICAS). This study aimed to evaluate sex differences in stroke recurrence among patients with sICAS and assess the efficacy of RIC in the RICA (chronic remote ischemic conditioning in patients with symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis) trial. The RICA trial was a multicenter, randomized clinical trial conducted across 84 stroke centers in China. Patients with sICAS were randomly assigned on a 1:1 ratio to receive either RIC intervention or sham RIC intervention once daily for 12 months. The primary endpoint was ischemic stroke recurrence. The median follow-up duration was 3.5 years. Of the 3,033 patients enrolled in the RICA trial, 1,079 (35.58%) were women. Female patients were generally older (mean [SD] age 62.9 [8.8] years versus 60 [9.2] years) and had a higher prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, and a higher body mass index than male patients. No significant difference was observed in ischemic stroke recurrence risk between female and male patients during a median follow-up of 3.5 years (20.5% versus 16.6%, adjusted hazard ratio, 1.18; [95% CI, 0.97 to 1.42]). However, RIC significantly reduced the risk of ischemic stroke recurrence in male patients, while no similar effect was observed in female patients (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.88; [95% CI, 0.58 to 1.32];
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.