ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
Risk factors for cardiac injury in patients with ischaemic stroke: a retrospective analysis.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To identify independent risk factors for cardiac injury (CI) in patients with ischaemic stroke (IS) through a retrospective analysis, providing evidence for early screening and intervention strategies. Methods: A single-center retrospective study was conducted among hospitalized patients with IS, who were classified into CI and non-CI groups. CI was defined as elevation of one or more cardiac biomarkers (cTnI/T, CK-MB, or BNP) above the upper reference limit, with concurrent ECG or echocardiographic abnormalities. Clinical characteristics, laboratory parameters, and prognostic variables were analyzed using univariate methods (chi-square test, Results: Across 393 patients with IS (100 with CI and 293 without CI), univariate analysis identified significant differences in multiple parameters, including age, vital signs, cardiac biomarkers (BNP, CK-MB, cardiac troponin I), inflammatory markers (hs-CRP, LDH), renal function (BUN, creatinine), coagulation markers (D-dimer), and comorbidities (atrial fibrillation, coronary heart disease, heart failure) between the groups ( Conclusion: Although GCS scores and BUN levels may be associated with CI in patients with IS, a clear operational definition of CI is essential for diagnostic consistency and early risk identification. Enhanced screening and monitoring of high-risk patients, combined with clinical and biomarker evaluation, are essential for optimizing early management strategies and improving outcomes.
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.