ObjectiveWe aim to identify and critically appraise clinical prediction models of mortality and function following ischaemic stroke.MethodsElectronic databases, reference lists, citations were searched from inception to September 2015. Studies were selected for inclusion, according to pre-specified criteria and critically appraised by independent, blinded reviewers. The discrimination of the prediction models was measured by the area under the curve receiver operating characteristic curve or c-statistic in random effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was measured using I2. Appropriate appraisal tools and reporting guidelines were used in this review.Results31395 references were screened, of which 109 articles were included in the review. These articles described 66 different predictive risk models. Appraisal identified poor methodological quality and a high risk of bias for most models. However, all models precede the development of reporting guidelines for prediction modelling studies. Generalisability of models could be improved, less than half of the included models have been externally validated(n = 27/66). 152 predictors of mortality and 192 predictors and functional outcome were identified. No studies assessing ability to improve patient outcome (model impact studies) were identified.ConclusionsFurther external validation and model impact studies to confirm the utility of existing models in supporting decision-making is required. Existing models have much potential. Those wishing to predict stroke outcome are advised to build on previous work, to update and adapt validated models to their specific contexts opposed to designing new ones.
BackgroundMedications targeting stroke risk factors have shown good efficacy, yet adherence is suboptimal. To improve adherence, its determinants must be understood. To date, no systematic review has mapped identified determinants into the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) in order to establish a more complete understanding of medication adherence.PurposeThe aim of this study was to identify psychological determinants that most influence stroke survivors’ medication adherence.MethodsIn line with the prospectively registered protocol (PROSPERO CRD42015016222), five electronic databases were searched (1953–2015). Hand searches of included full text references were undertaken. Two reviewers conducted screening, data extraction and quality assessment. Determinants were mapped into the TDF.ResultsOf 32,825 articles, 12 fulfilled selection criteria (N = 43,984 stroke survivors). Tested determinants mapped into 8/14 TDF domains. Studies were too heterogeneous for meta-analysis. Three TDF domains appeared most influential. Negative emotions (‘Emotions’ domain) such as anxiety and concerns about medications (‘Beliefs about Consequences’ domain) were associated with reduced adherence. Increased adherence was associated with better knowledge of medications (‘Knowledge’ domain) and stronger beliefs about medication necessity (‘Beliefs about Consequences’ domain). Study quality varied, often lacking information on sample size calculations.ConclusionsThis review provides foundations for evidence-based intervention design by establishing psychological determinants most influential in stroke survivors’ medication adherence. Six TDF domains do not appear to have been tested, possibly representing gaps in research design. Future research should standardise and clearly report determinant and medication adherence measurement to facilitate meta-analysis. The range of determinants explored should be broadened to enable more complete understanding of stroke survivors’ medication adherence.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12160-017-9906-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
IntroductionStroke is a leading cause of adult disability and death worldwide. The neurological impairments associated with stroke prevent patients from performing basic daily activities and have enormous impact on families and caregivers. Practical and accurate tools to assist in predicting outcome after stroke at patient level can provide significant aid for patient management. Furthermore, prediction models of this kind can be useful for clinical research, health economics, policymaking and clinical decision support.Methods2869 patients with first-ever stroke from South London Stroke Register (SLSR) (1995–2004) will be included in the development cohort. We will use information captured after baseline to construct multilevel models and a Cox proportional hazard model to predict cognitive impairment, functional outcome and mortality up to 5 years after stroke. Repeated random subsampling validation (Monte Carlo cross-validation) will be evaluated in model development. Data from participants recruited to the stroke register (2005–2014) will be used for temporal validation of the models. Data from participants recruited to the Dijon Stroke Register (1985–2015) will be used for external validation. Discrimination, calibration and clinical utility of the models will be presented.EthicsPatients, or for patients who cannot consent their relatives, gave written informed consent to participate in stroke-related studies within the SLSR. The SLSR design was approved by the ethics committees of Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, Kings College Hospital, Queens Square and Westminster Hospitals (London). The Dijon Stroke Registry was approved by the Comité National des Registres and the InVS and has authorisation of the Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés.
Purpose Understanding risk factors for an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) is important for optimizing patient care. We re-analyzed data from the Evaluation of COPD Longitudinally to Identify Predictive Surrogate Endpoints (ECLIPSE) study (NCT00292552) to identify factors predictive of re-exacerbations and associated with prolonged AECOPDs. Methods Patients with COPD from ECLIPSE with moderate/severe AECOPDs were included. The end of the first exacerbation was the index date. Timing of re-exacerbation risk was assessed in patients with 180 days’ post-index-date follow-up data. Factors predictive of early (1–90 days) vs late (91–180 days) vs no re-exacerbation were identified using a multivariable partial-proportional-odds-predictive model. Explanatory logistic-regression modeling identified factors associated with prolonged AECOPDs. Results Of the 1,554 eligible patients from ECLIPSE, 1,420 had 180 days’ follow-up data: more patients experienced early (30.9%) than late (18.7%) re-exacerbations; 50.4% had no re-exacerbation within 180 days. Lower post-bronchodilator FEV 1 ( P =0.0019), a higher number of moderate/severe exacerbations on/before index date ( P <0.0001), higher St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire total score ( P =0.0036), and season of index exacerbation (autumn vs winter, P =0.00164) were identified as predictors of early (vs late/none) re-exacerbation risk within 180 days. Similarly, these were all predictors of any (vs none) re-exacerbation risk within 180 days. Median moderate/severe AECOPD duration was 12 days; 22.7% of patients experienced a prolonged AECOPD. The odds of experiencing a prolonged AECOPD were greater for severe vs moderate AECOPDs (adjusted odds ratio=1.917, P =0.002) and lower for spring vs winter AECOPDs (adjusted odds ratio=0.578, P =0.017). Conclusion Prior exacerbation history, reduced lung function, poorer respiratory-related quality-of-life (greater disease burden), and season may help identify patients who will re-exacerbate within 90 days of an AECOPD. Severe AECOPDs and winter AECOPDs are likely to be prolonged and may require close monitoring.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.