ArticleTranslational stroke research2025
The Ratio Paradox in Stroke Prognosis: Abundant Evidence, Absent Utility.
Article in Translational stroke research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Laboratory ratios such as the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte, platelet-to-lymphocyte, and stress hyperglycemia ratios have been widely studied as prognostic markers in stroke. Despite hundreds of reports and multiple meta-analyses, these indices have shown modest effect sizes and have not influenced clinical guidelines or trial design. This commentary argues that such ratios serve as surrogates of systemic physiology rather than actionable prognostic tools, highlighting the gap between statistical association and clinical translation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41307643What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.