Hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke in patients with coronavirus disease 2019: incidence, risk factors, and pathogenesis - a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background : In this study, we aimed to determine the global prevalence, chronological order of symptom appearance, and mortality rates with regard to hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to discuss possible pathogeneses of hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke in individuals with the disease. Methods : We searched the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for relevant articles published up to November 8, 2020. Data regarding study characteristics, hemorrhagic stroke, ischemic stroke, and COVID-19 were retrieved in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the quality of the eligible studies. The pooled prevalence and mortality rate of hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke were calculated. Results : The pooled estimate of prevalence of hemorrhagic stroke was 0.46% (95% CI 0.40%–0.53%; I 2 =89.81%) among 67,155 COVID-19 patients and that of ischemic stroke was 1.11% (95% CI 1.03%–1.22%; I 2 =94.07%) among 58,104 COVID-19 patients. Ischemic stroke was more predominant (incidence: 71.58%) than hemorrhagic stroke (incidence: 28.42%) in COVID-19 patients who experienced a stroke. In COVID-19 patients who experienced a stroke, hospital admission with respiratory symptoms was more commonly reported than that with neurological symptoms (20.83% for hemorrhagic stroke and 5.51% for ischemic stroke versus 6.94% for hemorrhagic stroke and 5.33% for ischemic stroke, respectively). The pooled mortality rate of COVID-19 patients who experienced a hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke was 44.72% (95% CI 36.73%–52.98%) and 36.23% (95% CI 30.63%–42.24%), respectively. Conclusions : Although the occurrence of hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke is low, the mortality rates of both stroke types in patients with COVID-19 are concerning, and therefore, despite several potential pathogeneses that have been proposed, studies aimed at definitively elucidating the mechanisms of hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke in individuals with COVID-19 are warranted. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020224470 (04/12/20)
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.034 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".