Empirical evidence of bias in the design of experimental stroke studies: a metaepidemiologic approach

Background and Purpose: At least part of the failure in the transition from experimental to clinical studies in stroke has been attributed to the imprecision introduced by problems in the design of experimental stroke studies. Using a metaepidemiologic approach, we addressed the effect of randomization, blinding, and use of comorbid animals on the estimate of how effectively therapeutic interventions reduce infarct size. Methods: Electronic and manual searches were performed to identify meta-analyses that described interventions in experimental stroke. For each meta-analysis thus identified, a reanalysis was conducted to estimate the impact of various quality items on the estimate of efficacy, and these estimates were combined in a meta meta-analysis to obtain a summary measure of the impact of the various design characteristics. Results: Thirteen meta-analyses that described outcomes in 15 635 animals were included. Studies that included unblinded induction of ischemia reported effect sizes 13.1% (95% CI, 26.4% to 0.2%) greater than studies that included blinding, and studies that included healthy animals instead of animals with comorbidities overstated the effect size by 11.5% (95% CI, 21.2% to 1.8%). No significant effect was found for randomization, blinded outcome assessment, or high aggregate CAMARADES quality score. Conclusions: We provide empirical evidence of bias in the design of studies, with studies that included unblinded induction of ischemia or healthy animals overestimating the effectiveness of the intervention. This bias could account for the failure in the transition from bench to bedside of stroke therapies.

Relationship between therapeutic changes in blood pressure and outcomes in acute stroke: a metaregression

Both low and high blood pressure (BP) during the acute phase of stroke are associated independently with a poor outcome. Several small clinical trials have involved the alteration of BP and this study assessed the relationship between change in BP and functional outcome. Randomised controlled trials of interventions that would be expected, on pharmacological grounds, to alter BP in patients within one week of the onset of acute ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke were sought using electronic searches. Data were collected on BP and clinical outcome. The relationship between the difference in on-treatment BP and odds ratios (OR) for outcomes was assessed using meta-regression. Thirty-seven trials involving 9,008 patients were included. A ‘U’ or ‘J’ shaped relationship were found between on-treatment BP difference and early death, death at the end of 90 day follow up, and combined death or dependency at the end of follow up. Although outcomes were not significantly reduced at any level of change in BP, the lowest odds occurred at: early death (OR 0.87, 95% confidence interval, CI 0.54 to 1.23) - 8.1 mmHg; death at end of follow up (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.65) - 14.4 mmHg; and combined death or dependency at end of follow up (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.72) - 14.6 mmHg. Although large falls or increases in BP are associated with a worse outcome, modest reductions may reduce death, and combined death or dependency, although the confidence intervals are wide and compatible with overall benefit or hazard.