Evidence Hub

PREDICT-juvenile-stroke: PRospective evaluation of a prediction score determining individual clinical outcome three months after ischemic stroke in young adults - a study protocol

Schönecker S, Hoffmann V, Albashiti F, Thasler R, Hagedorn M, Louiset ML, Kopczak A, Rösler J et al.

BMC neurology, 2023

430 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although of high individual and socioeconomic relevance, a reliable prediction model for the prognosis of juvenile stroke (18-55 years) is missing. Therefore, the study presented in this protocol aims to prospectively validate the discriminatory power of a prediction score for the 3 months functional outcome after juvenile stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) that has been derived from an independent retrospective study using standard clinical workup data.

METHODS: PREDICT-Juvenile-Stroke is a multi-centre (n = 4) prospective observational cohort study collecting standard clinical workup data and data on treatment success at 3 months after acute ischemic stroke or TIA that aims to validate a new prediction score for juvenile stroke. The prediction score has been developed upon single center retrospective analysis of 340 juvenile stroke patients. The score determines the patient's individual probability for treatment success defined by a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0-2 or return to pre-stroke baseline mRS 3 months after stroke or TIA. This probability will be compared to the observed clinical outcome at 3 months using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. The primary endpoint is to validate the clinical potential of the new prediction score for a favourable outcome 3 months after juvenile stroke or TIA. Secondary outcomes are to determine to what extent predictive factors in juvenile stroke or TIA patients differ from those in older…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 430 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free