ArticleFrontiers in stroke2026
Quality monitoring in telestroke networks: real-world insights from survey response data and literature review.
Article 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
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims: The objective of telestroke services is to enhance the quality of stroke care delivered to remote locations. The American Heart Association/ American Stroke Association (AHA/ASA) and the European Stroke Organization (ESO) have issued recommendations for quality monitoring in telestroke. To provide real-world insights, our study analyzed data on quality monitoring practices among telestroke networks. Methodology: This is a secondary analysis of a global telestroke survey previously conducted by our group. The focus of the current analysis was on reported quality metrics. We also reviewed articles from our prior systematic review (SR) of the literature on telestroke networks to extract quality metrics from published data and compared these with those reported in survey responses. Results: Eighty-eight of 254 networks responded to the survey. The SR analyzed 92 studies describing 64 acute telestroke networks across 17 countries. Quality monitoring was performed in 64 of 88 surveyed networks (72%), and it was described in all networks identified in the published literature. The most frequently reported performance indicator across both data sources was thrombolysis rate (93% in survey, 87% in SR). Other recommended indicators were reported less frequently in both the survey and the SR, with recanalization rate reported as 54% vs. 35%, discharge NIHSS as 65% vs. 1%, and in-hospital mortality as 78% vs. 31%, respectively. Conclusion: Our study is the first real-world insight into the state of quality monitoring in telestroke, both from peer-reviewed literature and self-reported data. The observed heterogeneity and low uptake of recommended quality indicators highlight the potential need for consensus on a standardized minimal quality monitoring dataset to facilitate feasible quality monitoring and comparison of outcomes across networks.
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.