SynthesisBrain and behavior2026
Blood Pressure Reduction Time Windows in Stroke: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Brain and behavior, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal time windows for blood pressure reduction (BPR) treatment in patients with stroke remain controversial. This systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) evaluates the efficacy of different BPR time windows across stroke subtypes and assesses associated safety outcomes.
methodsA systematic review of RCTs was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science from their inception to March 21, 2026. Eligible trials enrolled patients with stroke treated with BPR. The primary outcome was mortality during follow-up. Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool were used to assess quality. A random-effects meta-analysis model was employed to pool the odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences, with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) reported.
resultsA total of 31 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), including 29,276 patients, were included. For ischemic stroke (IS) patients (13 RCTs, n = 17,220), prehospital BPR therapy was associated with increased mortality risk compared with the reference (OR 1.28, 95% CI [1.01, 1.61]) and the 48 h window (OR 1.34, 95% CI [1.01, 1.77]). In intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) patients (13 RCTs, n = 6826) and unspecified stroke patients (13 RCTs, n = 13,323), BPR therapy had no significant impact on mortality at any time window. Subgroup analyses were consistent with the primary findings.
conclusionsThis NMA suggests a potential association between prehospital BPR treatment and increased risk of stroke mortality in IS patients versus the reference and within 48 h BPR groups, although evidence confidence is limited. These findings support cautious prehospital BPR use pending stroke subtype confirmation and highlight the need for further high-quality studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.