ArticleNeurological research and practice2026
Association of stroke unit certification with process quality in acute ischemic stroke: a registry-based study.
Article in Neurological research and practice, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCertification of primary and comprehensive Stroke Units (pSU, cSU) was established in Germany to ensure standardized, guideline-adherent and quality-assured care for patients with acute ischemic stroke. However, real-world evidence remains limited that treatment quality is different in certified institutions. In this analysis we focused on potential differences between certified and non-certified institutions concerning various aspects of intravenous thrombolysis.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective registry-based observational analysis of patients with acute ischemic stroke in Hesse, Germany, between 2021 and 2024. Associations between stroke unit certification, intravenous thrombolysis (IVT), and process quality indicators were assessed using multivariable generalized linear mixed-effects models accounting for hospital-level clustering.
resultsA total of 59,514 patients with acute ischemic stroke were included. IVT within 4.5 h after symptom onset was performed significantly more often in certified stroke units than in non-certified hospitals (pSUs: OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.65-3.27; cSUs: OR 2.19, 95% CI 1.57-3.07). In the extended treatment window (> 4.5-24 h), higher odds of IVT were also observed in pSUs (OR 2.41, 95% CI 1.16-5.00) and cSUs (OR 4.20, 95% CI 2.07-8.50). Certified stroke units achieved guideline-recommended targets more often, including a door-to-needle time ≤ 60 min (pSUs: OR 3.13, 95% CI 2.13-4.61; cSUs: OR 2.60, 95% CI 1.80-3.75) and ≤ 30 min (pSUs: OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.04-3.28; cSUs: OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.62-4.99). No significant differences were observed between pSUs and cSUs.
conclusionsStroke unit certification was associated with a more frequent use of IVT and shorter door-to-needle times.
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.