The Utilization of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Stroke Guidelines

Background: Stroke guideline statements are important references for clinicians due to the rapidly evolving nature of treatments. Guideline statements should be informed by up-to-date systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) because they provide the highest level of evidence. To investigate the utilization of SRs/MAs in stroke management guidelines, we conducted a literature review of guidelines and extracted relevant information regarding SRs/MAs.

Methods: A literature review was conducted in PubMed with supplementation using the Trip medical database with the term "stroke" as the target population, followed by using the filter "guidelines". We extracted the number of included SRs/MAs, the years of publication, the country of origin, and other characteristics of interest. Descriptive statistics were generated using the R software version 4.2.1.

Results: We included 27 guideline statements. The median number of overall SRs or MAs within the guidelines was 4.0 (interquartile range [IQR] = 2-9). For MAs only, the median number included in the guidelines was 3.0 (IQR = 2.0-5.5). Canadian guidelines had the oldest citations, with a median gap of 12.0 (IQR = 5.2-18.0) years for the oldest citation, followed by European (median = 12; IQR = 9.5-13.5) and US (median = 10.0; IQR = 5.2-16) guidelines.

Conclusions: Stroke guideline writing groups and issuing bodies should devote greater effort to the inclusion of up-to-date SRs/MAs in their guideline statements so that clinicians can reference recent data with the highest level of evidence.