Evidence Hub

Temporal trends in cross-country inequalities of stroke and subtypes burden from 1990 to 2021: a secondary analysis of the global burden of disease study 2021

Zeyu Luo, Shiyi Shan, Jin Cao, Jia-Li Zhou, Liying Zhou, De-Nan Jiang, Lingzi Yao, Jing Wu et al.

EClinicalMedicine, 2024

108 citations

Abstract

Summary Background Stroke remains a significant global health challenge, with persistent disparities in burden across different countries and regions. This study aimed to assess the temporal trends in cross-country inequalities of stroke and its subtypes burden from 1990 to 2021. Methods We conducted a secondary analysis of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2021. The age-standardised disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) rate (ASDR) was used to assess the burden of stroke and its subtypes (ischemic stroke, intracerebral haemorrhage, and subarachnoid haemorrhage) across 21 GBD regions and 204 countries. The slope index of inequality (SII) and the concentration index were calculated to quantify the absolute and relative cross-country inequalities in the burden of stroke and its subtypes, with negative values indicating a higher burden in lower socio-demographic index (SDI) countries, and positive values indicating a higher burden in higher SDI countries. Estimated annual percentage change (EAPC) was used to illustrate temporal trends at global and regional levels from 1990 to 2021. The inequality changing patterns from 1990 to 2021 were classified as worsening, improving, and shifting to higher burdens among higher or lower SDI countries. Findings From 1990 to 2021, the ASDR of total stroke decreased from 3078.95 (95% uncertainty interval [UI]: 2893.58, 3237.34) to 1886.20 (95% UI: 1738.99, 2017.90) per 100,000 population globally. While…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis. 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.

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