Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 506

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 59 of the 59 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care for stroke

Open access
Stroke Unit Trialists' Collaboration·2013·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Organised stroke unit care is provided by multidisciplinary teams that exclusively manage stroke patients in a ward dedicated to stroke patients, with a mobile stroke team or within a generic disability service (mixed rehabilitation ward). OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of stroke unit care compared with alternative forms of care for people following a stroke. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the trials registers of the Cochrane Stroke Group (January 2013) and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group (January 2013), MEDLINE (2008 to September 2012), EMBASE (2008 to September 2012) and CINAHL (1982 to September 2012). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished and ongoing trials, we searched 17 trial registers (January 2013), performed citation tracking of included studies, checked reference lists of relevant articles and contacted trialists. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled clinical trials comparing organised inpatient stroke unit care with an alternative service. After formal risk of bias assessment, we have now excluded previously included quasi-randomised trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors initially assessed eligibility and trial quality. We checked descriptive details and trial data with the co-ordinators of the original trials. MAIN RESULTS: We included 28 trials, involving 5855 participants, comparing stroke unit care with an alternative service. More-organised care was consistently associated with improved outcomes. Twenty-one trials (3994 participants) compared stroke unit care with care provided in general wards. Stroke unit care showed reductions in the odds of death recorded at final (median one year) follow-up (odds ratio (OR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 0.94; P = 0.005), the odds of death or institutionalised care (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.89; P = 0.0003) and the odds of death or dependency (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.90; P = 0.0007). Sensitivity analyses indicated that the observed benefits remained when the analysis was restricted to securely randomised trials that used unequivocally blinded outcome assessment with a fixed period of follow-up. Outcomes were independent of patient age, sex, initial stroke severity or stroke type, and appeared to be better in stroke units based in a discrete ward. There was no indication that organised stroke unit care resulted in a longer hospital stay. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Stroke patients who receive organised inpatient care in a stroke unit are more likely to be alive, independent, and living at home one year after the stroke. The benefits were most apparent in units based in a discrete ward. We observed no systematic increase in the length of inpatient stay.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd000197.pub3

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 59 references

Cited by

See all 506

Metadata

Authors
Stroke Unit Trialists' Collaboration
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-09-11
Issue
9
Pages
CD000197-CD000197
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
OpenAlex
W4210248561
Cited by
506
References
59
FWCI
22.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care for stroke. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/14651858.cd000197.pub3
The paper
Stroke Unit Trialists' Collaboration. (2013). Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care for stroke. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd000197.pub3

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.