Trial reportFrontiers in stroke2026
Comparison of primary and secondary stroke outcomes between government and private healthcare institutions: insights from the SPRINT India trial.
Trial report in Frontiers in stroke, 2026. 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
41 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Stroke recurrence and vascular events remain major contributors to post-stroke mortality in India, where care is delivered through heterogeneous government and private healthcare systems. This Methods: SPRINT INDIA was a multicentre randomized controlled trial conducted across 31 centers (18 private, 13 government) within the Indian Stroke Clinical Trial Network (INSTRuCT). Adults with sub-acute stroke were randomized to a structured mHealth-supported secondary prevention intervention or standard care and followed for 1 year. The primary outcome was a composite of recurrent stroke, high-risk transient ischemic attack, acute coronary syndrome, and all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included functional status (modified Rankin Scale), behavioral risk factors, medication adherence, body mass index, physical activity, and laboratory measures of vascular risk. Outcomes were compared between government and private hospitals using adjusted regression models. Results: Among 4,298 randomized patients, 3,038 completed 1-year follow-up (59.8% private; 40.2% government). There was no significant difference was observed in the composite primary outcome between private and government institutions (2.8 vs. 3.7%; Conclusions: Stroke outcomes at 1 year were broadly comparable across healthcare sectors; however, the intervention demonstrated context-specific benefits, improving risk factors and functional recovery in government hospitals and reinforcing behavioral adherence in private hospitals. These findings highlight the importance of tailoring secondary stroke prevention strategies to healthcare system context. Clinical trial registration: http://ctri.nic.in, identifier: CTRI/2017/09/009600.
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.