Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 466

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Low glomerular filtration rate and risk of stroke: meta-analysis

Open access
Lee, M., Saver, J. L., Chang, K.-H., Liao, H.-W., Chang, S.-C., Ovbiagele, B.·2010·BMJ

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To qualitatively and quantitatively investigate the link between a low estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at baseline and risk of future stroke. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. DATA SOURCES: PubMed (1966-October 2009) and Embase (1947-October 2009). Selection criteria Inclusion criteria were studies that prospectively collected data within cohort studies or clinical trials, estimated glomerular filtration rate at baseline using the modification of diet in renal disease or Cockcroft-Gault equations, assessed incident stroke, had a follow-up of at least one year, and reported quantitative estimates of multivariate adjusted relative risk and 95% confidence interval for stroke associated with an eGFR of 60-90 ml/min/1.73 m(2) or <60 ml/min/1.73 m(2). Data abstraction Two investigators independently abstracted data from eligible studies. Estimates were combined using a random effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed by P value of χ(2) statistics and I(2). Publication bias was assessed by visual examination of funnel plots. RESULTS: 21 articles derived from 33 prospective studies: 14 articles assessed eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) and seven assessed eGRF at both <60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) and 60-90 ml/min/1.73 m(2) for a total of 284 672 participants (follow-up 3.2-15 years) with 7863 stroke events. Incident stroke risk increased among participants with an eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) (relative risk 1.43, 95% confidence interval 1.31 to 1.57; P<0.001) but not among those with an eGFR of 60-90 ml/min/1.73 m(2) (1.07, 0.98 to 1.17; P=0.15). Significant heterogeneity existed between estimates among patients with an eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) (P<0.001). In subgroup analyses among participants with an eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m(2), heterogeneity was significant in Asians compared with non-Asians (1.96, 1.73 to 2.23 v 1.25, 1.16 to 1.35; P<0.001), and those with an eGFR of 40-60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) v <40 ml/min/1.73 m(2) (1.28, 1.04 to 1.56 v 1.77, 1.32 to 2.38; P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: A baseline eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) was independently related to incident stroke across a variety of participants and study designs. Prompt and appropriate implementation of established strategies for reduction of vascular risk in people with know renal insufficiency may prevent future strokes.

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 · 10.1136/bmj.c4249

Cites

50 of 50 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 50 references

Cited by

See all 466

Metadata

Authors
Lee, M., Saver, J. L., Chang, K.-H., Liao, H.-W., Chang, S.-C., & Ovbiagele, B.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2010-09-30
Volume
341
Issue
sep30 1
Pages
c4249-c4249
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2075229735
Cited by
466
References
50
FWCI
16.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Low glomerular filtration rate and risk of stroke: meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.c4249
The paper
Lee, M., Saver, J. L., Chang, K.-H., Liao, H.-W., Chang, S.-C., & Ovbiagele, B. (2010). Low glomerular filtration rate and risk of stroke: meta-analysis. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c4249

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.