Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 653

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Long-term prognosis after intracerebral haemorrhage: systematic review and meta-analysis

Poon, M. T. C., Fonville, A. F., Al-Shahi Salman, R.·2014·Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM: There is uncertainty about the long-term prognosis after spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH). Therefore, we systematically reviewed the literature for studies reporting long-term survival and ICH recurrence, and their predictors. METHODS: We searched Ovid Medline 1946-2011 inclusive for cohort studies of ≥50 patients reporting long-term (>30 days) outcome after ICH. Two reviewers independently extracted data from each study. We meta-analysed 1-year and 5-year survival data from population-based studies using a random effects model (and quantified inconsistency using the I2 statistic). RESULTS: We identified 122 eligible studies. The pooled estimate of 1-year survival was 46% (95% CI 43% to 49%; nine population-based studies (n=2408); I2=27%) and 5-year survival was 29% (95% CI 26% to 33%; three population-based studies (n=699); I2=6%). In 27 cohort studies, predictors most consistently associated with death were increasing age, decreasing Glasgow Coma Scale score, increasing ICH volume, presence of intraventricular haemorrhage, and deep/infratentorial ICH location. The annual risk of recurrent ICH varied from 1.3% to 7.4% in nine studies and this risk was higher after lobar ICH than non-lobar ICH in two of three hospital-based studies. Four studies reporting the risks of recurrent ICH and ischaemic stroke after ICH found no significant differences between these risks. CONCLUSIONS: Less than a half of patients with ICH survive 1 year and less than a third survive 5 years. Risks of recurrent ICH and ischaemic stroke after ICH appear similar after ICH, provoking uncertainties about the use of antithrombotic drugs.

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/jnnp-2013-306476

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

See all 653

Metadata

Authors
Poon, M. T. C., Fonville, A. F., & Al-Shahi Salman, R.
Venue
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2013-11-21
Volume
85
Issue
6
Pages
660-667
ISSN
0022-3050 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2168934316
Cited by
653
References
4
FWCI
3.40
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: Long-term prognosis after intracerebral haemorrhage: systematic review and meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/jnnp-2013-306476
The paper
Poon, M. T. C., Fonville, A. F., & Al-Shahi Salman, R. (2014). Long-term prognosis after intracerebral haemorrhage: systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2013-306476

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.