Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 2 Characteristics of included case–control studies

From: Evidence of perceived psychosocial stress as a risk factor for stroke in adults: a meta-analysis

Author YearCountry Quality rating Cases: controls Type of controls % Male Cases: controls with stress Stress exposure and measure Stroke outcomes Previous stroke excluded Number of confounders controlled for in fully adjusted model
Risk estimates Odds Ratio (95 % CI)
Age range (y)
Jood, 2009 [15] Sweden 7 600 : 600 Population 18–69 64 126:46 Permanent self-perceived psychological stress General stress Non-fatal ischaemic Stroke No 10
Single question 3.49(2.06-5.91)
O’Donnell 2010 [16] 22 countries 5 3000 : 3000 63 589:440 Psycho-social stress General stress Non-fatal stroke (excludes SAH) Yes 13
Hospital or community    Single question 1.30(1.11-1.52)
Mean 61.1 (SD 12.7)
Abel, 1999 [32] USA 5 655:1087 44.6 % cases, 39.9 % controls Categorical boundary for stress risk factor not used so raw numbers ‘with stress RF’ not reported 20 point increase on GSRRS 35 item Geriatric Social Readjustment Rating Scale [43] General stress Fatal & non-fatal ischaemic stroke Yes 7
Community
Mean age
Cases 69.8 1.01(0.99-1.03)
Controls 70.2
Egido, 2012 [29] Spain 6 150:300 77.3 % cases, 36.3 % controls 62:50 (41.4 %:16.7 %) Score > =150on Holmes & Rahe 40-item questionnaire of life events [41] Non-fatal stroke (90 % were ischaemic) Yes 9
Population
8 item ERCTA (Recall Scale of Type A Behaviour [44]
Mean age
Cases 53.8
3.84(1.91-7.72)
(SD 9.3)
Controls 53.6
(SD 9.6)