Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Vascular contributions

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Background A predictive model of stroke mortality may be useful for clinicians to improve communication with and care of hospitalized patients. Our aim was to identify predictors of mortality and to develop and validate a risk score model using information available at hospital presentation. Methods and results This retrospective study included 12 262 community-based patients presenting with an acute ischemic stroke at multiple hospitals in Ontario, Canada, between 2003 and 2008 who had been identified from the Registry of the Canadian Stroke Network (8223 patients in the derivation cohort, 4039 in the internal validation cohort) and the Ontario Stroke Audit (3720 for the external validation cohort). The mortality rates for the derivation and internal validation cohorts were 12.2% and 12.6%, respectively, at 30 days and 22.5% and 22.9% at 1 year. Multivariable predictors of 30-day and 1-year mortality included older age, male sex, severe stroke, nonlacunar stroke subtype, glucose ≥7.5 mmol/L (135 mg/dL), history of atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, cancer, dementia, kidney disease on dialysis, and dependency before the stroke. A risk score index stratified the risk of death and identified low- and high- risk individuals. The c statistic was 0.850 for 30-day mortality and 0.823 for 1-year mortality for the derivation cohort, 0.851 for the 30-day model and 0.840 for the 1-year mortality model in the internal validation set, and 0.790 for the 30-day model and 0.782 for the 1-year model in the external validation set. Conclusion Among patients with ischemic stroke, factors identifiable within hours of hospital presentation predicted mortality risk at 30 days and 1 year. The predictive score may assist clinicians in estimating stroke mortality risk and policymakers in providing a quantitative tool to compare facilities.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Saposnik, G., Kapral, M. K., Liu, Y., Hall, R., O'Donnell, M., Raptis, S., et al. (2011). IScore: a risk score to predict death early after hospitalization for an acute ischemic stroke. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.110.983353

Vancouver

Saposnik G, Kapral MK, Liu Y, Hall R, O'Donnell M, Raptis S, et al. IScore: a risk score to predict death early after hospitalization for an acute ischemic stroke. Circulation. 2011. doi:10.1161/circulationaha.110.983353. PMID: 21300951.

BibTeX

@article{saposnik2011-21300951,
  author  = {Saposnik, G. and Kapral, M. K. and Liu, Y. and Hall, R. and O'Donnell, M. and Raptis, S. and Tu, J. V. and Mamdani, M. and others},
  title   = {{IScore: a risk score to predict death early after hospitalization for an acute ischemic stroke}},
  journal = {Circulation},
  year    = {2011},
  doi     = {10.1161/circulationaha.110.983353},
  pmid    = {21300951},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.110.983353}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 51/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 1 of 4; Effect reported 2 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration 2 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 31 of the 61 points it could be judged on, which is 51 of 100. Total 51 of 100.31 of the 61 points we could judge = 51 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record and institution's track record, so those were left out: it earned 31 of the 61 points we could judge it on, which is 51 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Circulation)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 3 / 5 Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 2011 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 1 / 4 12 participants
Effect reported 2 / 3 Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration 2 / 3 PubMed indexes it as a multicentre study
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 21300951)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 31 / 61 Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 31 of the 61 points we could judge it on is 51 out of 100.
Total 51 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Related studies in Vascular contributions

Also tagged “delirium”

858 studies in the library carry the topic tag “delirium”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 858 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Vascular contributions

See all studies in Vascular contributions →