Risks of stroke and myocardial infarction after retinal artery occlusion and their time dependence: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Retinal artery occlusion (RAO) is an ophthalmic emergency that may signal underlying cardiovascular disease. Both stroke and myocardial infarction (MI) share pathophysiological mechanisms and risk factors with RAO. This systematic review aimed to assess the risks of stroke and MI following the onset of RAO, with a focus on their time-dependent changes. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for articles reporting incidence of stroke and MI after RAO. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was employed to evaluate the quality of study. Pooled relative risks for stroke and MI risks following RAO were calculated by random-effects models, and the time-dependent change of these risks was analyzed. RESULTS: Twelve studies involving 319 748 people were included. Pooled analysis showed that RAO was associated with a significantly increased risk of stroke (RR = 3.64, 95% CI: 2.53-5.25, p < 0.0001), particularly within the first month after RAO. MI risk showed an upward trend (RR = 1.38, 95% CI: 0.80-2.40, p = 0.2478), but did not reach statistical significance. Time-stratified analyses revealed the highest incidence of stroke and MI within 30 days post-RAO. CONCLUSION: RAO is strongly associated with an elevated short-term risk of stroke, underscoring the need for prompt cerebrovascular evaluation and monitoring within the first month. Although the association between RAO and MI was less conclusive, cardiovascular assessment remains warranted. These findings highlight RAO as an important marker of systemic vascular disease requiring timely intervention.
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 | 0.008 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.035 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".