The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Meta-analysis of relation between cigarette smoking and stroke.
Open accessAbstract
There is a lack of consensus among studies on the possible risks of stroke from cigarette smoking; because of this a meta-analysis was conducted. All published data on the association were sought and the relative risk for each study obtained whenever possible. The pooled relative risks were calculated by using estimates of the precision of the individual relative risks to weight their contribution to the meta-analysis. Thirty two separate studies were analysed. The overall relative risk of stroke associated with cigarette smoking was 1.5 (95% confidence interval 1.4 to 1.6). Considerable differences were seen in relative risks among the subtypes: cerebral infarction 1.9, cerebral haemorrhage 0.7, and subarachnoid haemorrhage 2.9. An effect of age on the relative risk was also noted; less than 55 years 2.9, 55-74 years 1.8, and greater than or equal to 75 years 1.1. A dose response between the number of cigarettes smoked and relative risk was noted, and there was a small increased risk in women compared with men. Ex-smokers under the age of 75 seemed to retain an appreciably increased risk of stroke (1.5); for all ages the relative risk in ex-smokers was 1.2. The meta-analysis provides strong evidence of an excess risk of stroke among cigarette smokers. Stroke should therefore be added to the list of diseases related to smoking.
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
Cites
Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: An overview of the randomized trials
Yusuf, S., Peto, R., Lewis, J., Collins, R., & Sleight, P. (1985) · Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases · doi:10.1016/s0033-0620(85)80003-7 · Cited by 3,205
Smoking and mortalities from cancer, coronary heart disease and stroke in male Japanese physicians
Kono, S., Ikeda, M., Tokudome, S., Nishizumi, M., & Kuratsune, M. (1985) · Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1007/bf00402732 · Cited by 23
Cited by
Beneficial Effect of Carotid Endarterectomy in Symptomatic Patients with High-Grade Carotid Stenosis
(1991) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199108153250701 · Cited by 8,368
Kernan, W. N., Ovbiagele, B., Black, H. R., Bravata, D. M., Chimowitz, M. I., Ezekowitz, M. D., Fang, M. C., Fisher, M., Furie, K. L., Heck, D. V., et al. (2014) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/str.0000000000000024 · Cited by 5,170
Kleindorfer, D. O., Towfighi, A., Chaturvedi, S., Cockroft, K. M., Gutierrez, J., Lombardi-Hill, D., Kamel, H., Kernan, W. N., Kittner, S. J., Leira, E. C., et al. (2021) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/str.0000000000000375 · Cited by 3,237
Meschia, J. F., Bushnell, C., Boden-Albala, B., Braun, L. T., Bravata, D. M., Chaturvedi, S., Creager, M. A., Eckel, R. H., Elkind, M. S. V., Fornage, M., et al. (2014) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/str.0000000000000046 · Cited by 2,650
Sacco, R. L., Adams, R., Albers, G., Alberts, M. J., Benavente, O., Furie, K., Goldstein, L. B., Gorelick, P., Halperin, J., Harbaugh, R., et al. (2006) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/01.str.0000199147.30016.74 · Cited by 1,873
Metadata
- Authors
- Shinton, R., & Beevers, G.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1989-03-25
- Volume
- 298
- Issue
- 6676
- Pages
- 789-794
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- OpenAlex
- W1966630835
- Cited by
- 1,039
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 6.51
- 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: Meta-analysis of relation between cigarette smoking and stroke. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.298.6676.789
- The paper
- Shinton, R., & Beevers, G. (1989). Meta-analysis of relation between cigarette smoking and stroke. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.298.6676.789
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.