Retrospective cohort study develops a model predicting recovery in stroke patients, indicating effective interventions.
Objective: This study aimed to develop and validate a risk prediction model for unfavorable functional recovery at 6 months after stroke, incorporating clinical and modifiable nursing-related predictors to support early risk stratification and individualized nursing interventions. Methods: A retrospective cohort study included 1340 stroke patients from a tertiary hospital. Demographic, clinical, imaging, nursing, and psychosocial data were collected. The dataset was split into training and testing sets at a 7:3 ratio using outcome-stratified sampling. Univariate analysis and multivariable logistic regression were used as a predictor screening procedure. A nomogram-based risk prediction model was developed and evaluated for discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility. Patients were further stratified into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups based on predicted probability tertiles from the training set. Results: Older age, prior stroke history, comorbidity burden, longer onset-to-admission time, greater neurological deficit severity, lower Glasgow Coma Scale score, and brainstem lesions were independent predictors of unfavorable recovery. Early out-of-bed mobilization within 48 hours, higher self-management behavior score, absence of depressive symptoms, and better social support were linked to reduced risk. The model showed good discrimination and calibration in both sets. Risk stratification showed a stepwise increase in unfavorable recovery rates across the three risk groups. Decision curve analysis indicated net clinical benefit within a reasonable threshold probability range. Conclusion: The developed model combines clinical and modifiable nursing-related predictors and demonstrates good predictive performance. It may serve as a practical tool for early risk stratification and targeted nursing interventions in stroke patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sun et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: