ArticleEuropean stroke journal2026
Enhancing stroke care in Europe: cost-effectiveness analysis of strategies addressing gaps in acute ischemic stroke care.
Article in European stroke journal, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAcute ischemic stroke (AIS) is a leading cause of disability and mortality worldwide, resulting in a significant economic burden. The European Stroke Action Plan set targets to improve stroke care, but substantial variation persists across countries. PATIENTS AND
methodsA decision-analytic model was developed. By comparing baseline performance in stroke care, based on data from 2015 to 2020, with the performance when meeting targets set on incidence, time and access to treatment and prevention, we estimated the potential clinical and economic impact in 7 European countries. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, based on costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs); secondary outcomes included disability (modified Rankin Scale; mRS).
resultsAchieving the targets produced meaningful health gains in all countries, with several scenarios being dominant. Reducing stroke incidence had the greatest overall impact. Among the remaining targets, shorter time to treatment was dominant in France, Italy and the United Kingdom, and consistently reduced disability across countries (0.9%-14.3% point decreases in patients with mRS 3-5). Increasing endovascular treatment rates showed the greatest effect in Sweden and Spain and remained cost-effective elsewhere (€1823-€5331 per QALY gained). Reducing recurrent stroke delivered the largest cost savings in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom (€436 and €483 per patient, respectively) whilst generating QALY gains.
conclusionAlthough reducing stroke incidence yields the greatest overall benefit, optimal strategies differ between countries. Tailored approaches addressing country-specific care gaps will be essential to maximise health gains, reduce disability and improve economic efficiency of stroke care.
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.