↓ Skip to main content

Baseline characteristics, analysis plan and report on feasibility for the Prevention Of Decline in Cognition After Stroke Trial (PODCAST)

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Baseline characteristics, analysis plan and report on feasibility for the Prevention Of Decline in Cognition After Stroke Trial (PODCAST)
Published in
Trials, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13063-015-1033-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Polly Scutt, Dan Blackburn, Kailash Krishnan, Clive Ballard, Alistair Burns, Gary A. Ford, Jonathan Mant, Peter Passmore, Stuart Pocock, John Reckless, Nikola Sprigg, Rob Stewart, Joanna M. Wardlaw, Philip M. Bath

Abstract

A common complication after stroke is development of cognitive impairment and dementia. However, effective strategies for reducing the risk of developing these problems remain undefined. Potential strategies include intensive lowering of blood pressure (BP) and/or lipids. This paper summarises the baseline characteristics, statistical analysis plan and feasibility of a randomised control trial of blood pressure and lipid lowering in patients post-stroke with the primary objective of reducing cognitive impairment and dementia. The Prevention Of Decline in Cognition After Stroke Trial (PODCAST) was a multi-centre prospective randomised open-label blinded-endpoint controlled partial-factorial internal pilot trial running in secondary and primary care. Participants without dementia were enrolled 3-7 months post ischaemic stroke or spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage, and randomised to intensive versus guideline BP lowering (target systolic BP <125 mmHg versus <140 mmHg); patients with ischaemic stroke were also randomised to intensive or guideline lipid lowering (target LDL cholesterol <1.4 mmol/L versus <3 mmol/L). The primary outcome was the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised; a key secondary outcome was to assess feasibility of performing a large trial of one or both interventions. Data are number (%) or mean (standard deviation). The trial was planned to last for 8 years with follow-up between 1 and 8 years. The plan for reporting the main results is included as Additional file 2. 83 patients (of a planned 600) were recruited from 19 UK sites between 7 October 2010 and 31 January 2014. Delays, due to difficulties in the provision of excess treatment costs and to complexity of follow-up, led to few centres taking part and a much lower recruitment rate than planned. Patient characteristics at baseline were: age 74 (SD 7) years, male 64 (77 %), index stroke ischaemic 77 (93 %), stroke onset to randomisation 4.5 [SD 1.3] months, Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised 86 (of 100, SD 8), Montreal Cognitive Assessment 24 (of 30, SD 3), BP 147/82 (SD 19/11) mmHg, total cholesterol 4.0 (SD 0.8) mmol/L and LDL cholesterol 2.0 (SD 0.7) mmol/L, modified Rankin Scale 1.1 (SD 0.8). Limited recruitment suggests that a large trial is not feasible using the current protocol. The effects of the interventions on BP, lipids, and cognition will be reported in the main publication. ISRCTN85562386 registered on 23 September 2009.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Unknown 97 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 18%
Student > Master 16 16%
Student > Bachelor 14 14%
Unspecified 13 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 10%
Other 28 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 25%
Unspecified 22 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 11%
Psychology 11 11%
Social Sciences 9 9%
Other 21 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 November 2015.
All research outputs
#3,082,844
of 11,907,020 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#1,193
of 2,858 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,783
of 253,717 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#47
of 172 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,907,020 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,858 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 253,717 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 172 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.