ReviewStroke2025
Proposal for the Ischemic Stroke Phenotyping System 2025: ISPS25.
Review in Stroke, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Early Reperfusion in Basilar Artery Occlusion Stroke Managed With Tenecteplase Versus Alteplase Before Endovascular Treatment.Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Delayed ischemic stroke ten days after aluminum phosphide ingestion in a previously healthy 21-year-old Ethiopian woman: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2026Article
- Diagnosis and Management of Patent Foramen Ovale for Stroke Prevention: An Australian and New Zealand Consensus Statement Developed by a Modified Nominal Group Approach.The Medical journal of Australia · 2026Article
- Cerebral Infarction: Epidemiology, Classification, Mechanisms, Diagnosis, and Management.MedComm · 2026Review
- Cerebrocentric bias in stroke terminology and the hemovascular paradigm: a conceptual reframing of cerebrovascular disease classification.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
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
Abstract
Over the last 30 years, several classification systems have been proposed or used to aid in patients with subtyping ischemic stroke based on its likely etiology. Since these classification systems have been published, the field has gained more knowledge about newly reported mechanisms (eg, carotid artery web), new treatments being effective (eg, patent foramen ovale closure), and new diagnostic testing (eg, prolonged outpatient cardiac monitoring). Therefore, an updated ischemic stroke classification system is needed to integrate these advancements, enabling a more targeted workup and potentially improving treatment strategies. We propose a more comprehensive but practical and generalizable diagnostic evaluation and checklist for patients with ischemic stroke to help identify definite, probable, or possible mechanisms related to cardioembolism, large artery atherosclerosis, small vessel disease, or other determined causes (eg, hypercoagulable disorders, genetic disorders, cancer, or dissection). This expands the minimum diagnostic evaluation, leading to reclassification of patients and possibly improving secondary stroke prevention strategies. This will also create a new framework for targeted treatments and randomized trials for various ischemic stroke subtypes.
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.