The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Trends in Community Knowledge of the Warning Signs and Risk Factors for Stroke
Abstract
CONTEXT: Poor public knowledge of stroke warning signs and risk factors limits effective stroke intervention and prevention. OBJECTIVE: To examine temporal trends in public knowledge of stroke warning signs and risk factors. DESIGN AND SETTING: Population-based random-digit telephone survey conducted in July-November 2000 among individuals in the greater Cincinnati, Ohio, region. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2173 survey respondents (69% response rate) were randomly identified based on their demographic similarities to the ischemic stroke population with regard to age, race, and sex. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Spontaneous recall of at least 1 important stroke warning sign and 1 established stroke risk factor in comparison with findings from the same survey in 1995. RESULTS: In 2000, 70% of respondents correctly named at least 1 established stroke warning sign vs 57% in 1995 (P<.001), and 72% correctly named at least 1 established stroke risk factor vs 68% in 1995. Groups of individuals with the highest risk and incidence of stroke, such as persons at least 75 years old, blacks, and men, were the least knowledgeable about warning signs and risk factors. Television was the most frequently cited source of knowledge, 32% in 2000 vs 24% in 1995 (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Public knowledge of stroke warning signs within the greater Cincinnati region has significantly improved from 1995 to 2000, although knowledge of stroke risk factors did not improve significantly during the same time period. Public education efforts must continue and should focus on groups at the highest risk of stroke.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2010 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association
WRITING GROUP MEMBERS, Lloyd-Jones, D., Adams, R. J., Brown, T. M., Carnethon, M., Dai, S., De Simone, G., Ferguson, T. B., Ford, E., Furie, K., et al. (2010) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.109.192667 · Cited by 5,700
Rosamond, W., Flegal, K., Friday, G., Furie, K., Go, A., Greenlund, K., Haase, N., Ho, M., Howard, V., Kissela, B., et al. (2007) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.106.179918 · Cited by 3,277
WRITING GROUP MEMBERS, Lloyd-Jones, D., Adams, R., Carnethon, M., De Simone, G., Ferguson, T. B., Flegal, K., Ford, E., Furie, K., Go, A., et al. (2009) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.108.191261 · Cited by 3,140
Bushnell, C., McCullough, L. D., Awad, I. A., Chireau, M. V., Fedder, W. N., Furie, K. L., Howard, V. J., Lichtman, J. H., Lisabeth, L. D., Piña, I. L., et al. (2014) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/01.str.0000442009.06663.48 · Cited by 941
Cruz-Flores, S., Rabinstein, A., Biller, J., Elkind, M. S. V., Griffith, P., Gorelick, P. B., Howard, G., Leira, E. C., Morgenstern, L. B., Ovbiagele, B., et al. (2011) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/str.0b013e3182213e24 · Cited by 507
Metadata
- Authors
- Schneider, A. T., Pancioli, A. M., Khoury, J. C., Rademacher, E., Tuchfarber, A., Miller, R., Woo, D., Kissela, B., & Broderick, J. P.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2003-01-15
- Volume
- 289
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 343
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2045933635
- Cited by
- 348
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Trends in Community Knowledge of the Warning Signs and Risk Factors for Stroke. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.289.3.343
- The paper
- Schneider, A. T., Pancioli, A. M., Khoury, J. C., Rademacher, E., Tuchfarber, A., Miller, R., Woo, D., Kissela, B., & Broderick, J. P. (2003). Trends in Community Knowledge of the Warning Signs and Risk Factors for Stroke. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.289.3.343
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.