ANGWC Nomogram for Predicting Poor 3-month Outcome after Intravenous Thrombolysis in Young and Middle-Aged Patients with First-Ever Stroke
Rattachement africain : cn. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Background: The rising prevalence of ischemic stroke among younger individuals is concerning. Despite the significant benefits of intravenous thrombolytic therapy for young and middle-aged patients, the disease burden in this demographic is often overshadowed by that of older patient groups. This study aims to identify the risk factors for poor 3-month outcomes following intravenous thrombolysis in young and middle-aged patients with first-ever stroke and to develop a novel nomogram. Methods: This prospective study included patients aged 18 to 59 years with a first ischemic stroke from 16 hospitals. Patients from one of the hospitals were designated as the training cohort. General information and clinical data were compared between the favorable outcome (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score < 2) and the poor outcome groups (mRS score ≥ 2). Logistic regression analysis was used to develop the nomogram. An additional 113 patients from the other 15 hospitals were recruited as the validation cohort. Results: -value > 0.05, and calibration curve slopes were close to 1. Decision curve analysis indicated good clinical utility. Conclusion: The ANGWC nomogram provides a reliable prediction of poor 3-month outcomes after intravenous thrombolysis in young and middle-aged patients with first-ever stroke.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- ANGWC Nomogram for Predicting Poor 3-month Outcome after Intravenous Thrombolysis in Young and Middle-Aged Patients with First-Ever Stroke
- Date Crossref
- 11/08/2025
- Éditeur
- Georg Thieme Verlag KG
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.