SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2026
A systematic review of intracranial atherosclerosis epidemiology-the largest contributor to the global ischemic stroke burden?
Synthesis in Frontiers in 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Intracranial atherosclerosis (ICAD) is commonly stated to be the largest contributor to the ischemic stroke burden worldwide. However, there has been little systematic examination of the epidemiology literature. Methods: PubMed, OVID-EMBASE and manual searches of references from retrieved literature were used to identify studies. Adult studies from 1990 onwards were included, with two reviewers independently reviewing titles and abstracts. Risk of bias was assessed using modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results: There were 138 studies included in the systematic review. Due to risk of bias and inconsistent definitions, there was low certainty in the findings of this systematic review. Moderate and high-quality studies based in Asia found that 8.8%-41.1% of stroke was due to ICAD, compared to 2.2%-11.1% in Europe and 7.5%-25% in North America. Moderate and high-quality studies investigating stroke recurrence in ICAD found a rate of 8%-28.3%. Moderate and high-quality studies investigating ICAD prevalence in unselected populations found a prevalence of 2.6%-58.5%. Moderate and high-quality studies found an ICAD prevalence of 5.4%-64.7% amongst stroke patients, compared with 15.5% found by a high-quality study from Europe. Conclusions: Epidemiological studies of ICAD demonstrate significant heterogeneity in design and risk of bias, leading to uncertainty regarding the true burden of this important disease. Nevertheless, current literature suggests that ICAD is at least as important as the other major etiologies in its contribution to the global ischemic stroke burden, highlighting the need for further research to inform therapeutic advances.
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.