ArticleEClinicalMedicine2025
Clinical prediction rules for cognitive outcomes post-stroke: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Association of Sarcopenia With Global, Motor, Cognitive, and Swallowing Function Prognosis in Stroke Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Brain and behavior · 2026Pooled it
- Machine learning-based prediction model for cognitive frailty in elderly patients with ischaemic stroke: a prospective cohort study.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Article
- Clinical prediction rules for cognitive outcomes post-stroke: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Survivors of stroke are at a higher risk of cognitive syndromes, including dementia and delirium. Timely identification of those at-risk for cognitive syndromes could ensure better clinical management and implementation of risk reduction strategies. This study updates and appraises current evidence on prognostic accuracy of multicomponent risk models for post-stroke cognitive syndromes. Methods: In this updated systematic review, we searched multidisciplinary electronic databases between November 2019 and October 2024 for relevant studies. An updated search was conducted on May 30, 2025. Studies were included if they described a multicomponent risk prediction tool developed in a stroke population (aged ≥18 years), free of cognitive impairment/dementia at baseline, with no exclusions on language. All study designs of primary research were eligible provided the study reported a multicomponent model at any point to predict participant cognitive outcomes i.e., incident cognitive impairment, dementia or delirium. Multicomponent refers to having more than one feature in the model e.g. if the study only reported the discriminatory accuracy of a cognitive score this was not eligible. All studies had to report sufficient discriminative performance metrics to assess model performance. Data were extracted from selected studies using a pre-specified proforma. Risk of bias was assessed using the Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST), certainty of evidence by GRADE, and between-study heterogeneity via Findings: From 16,259 articles, 20 new studies contributed 31 models for post-stroke cognitive impairment and/or dementia and six models for post-stroke delirium with most developed in Asia (n = 12). Most models (n = 10) used logistic regression, with some using machine learning methods (n = 5). Development cohorts were small (mean n = 677). The pooled c-statistic for post-stroke cognitive impairment and delirium were 0.81 (95% CI 0.77-0.85, Interpretation: Development of risk models to predict cognitive syndromes post-stroke has increased. Development cohorts remain small, largely developed in Asia with very few assessing model transportability. Future studies should pool data and utilise the potential of routinely collected large datasets. Stakeholder engagement and cost-effectiveness of risk-stratified interventions are needed prior to clinical implementation. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research Advanced Fellowship.
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.