ArticleBMJ open2025
Enhancing acute stroke care in Ireland: A scoping review and Delphi consensus for the Irish National Audit of Stroke (INAS) dataset.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. 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.
- Federating European REgistries for Stroke: Principles, Data Model and Future Perspectives for a Federated Analysis of Multiple Prospective Stroke Registries.European journal of neurology · 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo develop an updated core dataset for acute stroke care in Ireland, informed by international audit benchmarking and national stakeholder consensus, for integration into the Irish National Audit of Stroke (INAS).
designScoping review and three-round Delphi process. DATA SOURCES: Medline Ovid, Embase, CINAHL EBSCOhost, Google Scholar, audit websites and grey literature (2010-2024). Additional audit documentation was obtained via direct author contact. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: National stroke audits or registries with a country-wide scope, ≥1 year of continuous data collection and active in 2021 were eligible. Only audits covering acute stroke care were included in this study phase. All records were screened for inclusion. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Audit documentation (data dictionaries, item definitions and contextual metadata) was retrieved from eligible audits. Acute stroke care items were extracted, charted and benchmarked against existing INAS items and each other to identify commonalities and gaps. Frequently collected international items (appearing in ≥4 audits/registries) were shortlisted. A three-round Delphi process with 24 national stakeholders (clinicians, nurses, allied health professionals, researchers, policymakers and patient representatives) was conducted to audit and refine the dataset through structured, anonymised item rating, iterative feedback and consensus-building discussions.
resultsTwenty-one eligible international stroke audits/registries were identified, yielding ~4500 audit items. Benchmarking against existing INAS items (n=103), frequently collected international items (n=97) and expert-suggested items (n=22) informed the Delphi consultation. The final dataset expanded INAS by 18 items, totalling 86 acute care and 35 thrombectomy-specific items. New additions included stroke-related complications and risk factor documentation.
conclusionsThis structured, consensus-led process resulted in an internationally benchmarked, stakeholder-informed core dataset to enhance standardised stroke auditing in Ireland. The expanded dataset supports enhanced clinical monitoring, quality improvement and health system planning. This approach may inform audit development and research efforts in other contexts.
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.