Evidence Hub

Association of Traditional and Non-Traditional Risk Factors in the Development of Strokes Among Young Adults by Sex and Age Group; A Retrospective Case-Control Study

Michelle H. Leppert, Sharon N. Poisson, Sharon L. Scarbro, Krithika Suresh, Lynda D. Lisabeth, J. Putaala, Lee H. Schwamm, Stacie L. Daugherty et al.

Circulation. Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, 2024

24 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite women having fewer traditional risk factors (eg, hypertension, diabetes), strokes are more common in women than men aged ≤45 years. This study examined the contributions of traditional and nontraditional risk factors (eg, migraine, thrombophilia) in the development of strokes among young adults. METHODS: This retrospective case-control study used Colorado’s All Payer Claims Database (2012–2019). We identified index stroke events in young adults (aged 18–55 years), matched 1:3 to stroke-free controls, by (1) sex, (2) age±2 years, (3) insurance type, and (4) prestroke period. All traditional and nontraditional risk factors were identified from enrollment until a stroke or proxy-stroke date (defined as the prestroke period). Conditional logistic regression models stratified by sex and age group first assessed the association of stroke with counts of risk factors by type and then computed their individual and aggregated population attributable risks. RESULTS: We included 2618 cases (52% women; 73.3% ischemic strokes) and 7827 controls. Each additional traditional and nontraditional risk factors were associated with an increased risk of stroke in all sex and age groups. In adults aged 18 to 34 years, more strokes were associated with nontraditional (population attributable risk: 31.4% men and 42.7% women) than traditional risk factors (25.3% men and 33.3% women). The contribution of nontraditional risk factors declined with age (19.4% men and 27.9% women aged…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case-control, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause.

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