ArticleBMJ open2026
Preventing the next stroke: nurse-led decision and adherence coaching to empower people with stroke (StrokeCompass) versus usual care - study protocol for a stepped-wedge pilot trial.
Article in BMJ open, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRecurrent stroke prevention is important for people who have suffered a stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA), as they are at increased risk of having another stroke. Nevertheless, treatment adherence is often low. Therefore, the StrokeCompass project was initiated to enhance medication adherence by empowering individuals who have had a stroke to take an active role in recurrent stroke prevention and medication management. In accordance with the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) guidelines, a complex intervention was developed that integrated evidence-based decision aids and a personalised, nurse-led coaching programme. The present stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled study addresses the second phase of the MRC framework by pilot testing the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention in a clinical setting. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A total of 452 patients with a recent ischaemic stroke or TIA will be recruited over a period of 16 months from seven stroke units across Germany. The study centres will be randomised and sequentially crossed over from the control phase to the intervention phase in three time periods (4, 8 and 12 months after initiation) until all clusters have been exposed to both conditions. The intervention comprises four core elements: first, a decision coaching programme, second, a physician consultation to discuss treatment targets, third, an adherence coaching programme, and fourth, a web-based patient decision aid. Furthermore, we developed a preparatory training programme for nurses and physicians. Feasibility outcomes (eg, recruitment strategies, participation, implementation and utilisation of intervention) will be analysed descriptively, while preliminary estimates of effectiveness, measured by changes in risk factor targets (eg, blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels), will be analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Furthermore, an economic evaluation will be conducted focusing on the implementation costs. These findings could prove pivotal in the subsequent planning and rationale for a full-powered effectiveness study. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has received ethical approval from the Ethical Committee of the University of Lübeck (reference 2024-522). We will disseminate the findings in peer-reviewed journals, at conferences, and on relevant patient websites. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00036091.
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.