SynthesisBMC neurology2026
Risk prediction models for early neurological deterioration after intravenous thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC neurology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAn increasing number of risk prediction models have been developed to predict early neurological deterioration (END) in patients with acute ischemic stroke after intravenous thrombolysis. However, the methodological quality and clinical applicability of these models remain unclear.
objectiveTo systematically review studies on risk prediction models for END in patients with acute ischemic stroke treated with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT).
designSystematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.
methodsSeven databases (CNKI, Wanfang Database, VIP database, PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and Embase) were systematically searched from inception to December 20, 2025. Information extracted from the included studies comprised study design, data sources, outcome definitions, sample size, predictors, model development methods, and model performance. The Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) was used to assess evaluate the risk of bias and applicability of the included studies.
resultsEighteen studies were ultimately included, comprising 18 prediction models. All studies utilized logistic regression to predict END. The incidence of END after IVT among patients with acute ischemic stroke patients ranged from 7.7% to 31.3%. The baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score was the most frequently identified predictor. All studies were rated as having a high risk of bias based on the PROBAST assessment, primarily due to inconsistent outcome definitions, inappropriate data sources, and inadequate reporting within the analysis domain. The pooled area under the curve (AUC) for the five validated models was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.84-0.91), suggesting moderate predictive performance.
conclusionAlthough the included prediction models showed moderate discriminative performance for END in patients with acute ischemic stroke following intravenous thrombolysis, all studies were assessed as having a high risk of bias based on the PROBAST checklist. These findings emphasize the need for nurse-led risk monitoring, standardized neurological assessments, and early preventive nursing interventions for high-risk patients. CLINICAL
trial registrationThe protocol for this study is registered with PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42025628890).
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.