Lacunar stroke (cases) vs Without lacunar stroke (controls): Clinical attachment level (CAL)
Patients with lacunar stroke had greater clinical attachment loss than those without (MD 1.34); ungraded, with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 95%).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Lacunar stroke (cases) vs Without lacunar stroke (controls) Clinical attachment level (CAL) · Adults · Clinical (Japan and Republic of Chile) Patients with lacunar stroke had greater clinical attachment loss than those without (MD 1.34); ungraded, with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 95%). The contribution of oral infectious diseases in lacunar stroke based on meta-analysis and Mendelian… (2025) All outcomes | MD 1.34 [0.63, 2.05] | 4 studies | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| The contribution of oral infectious diseases in lacunar stroke based on meta-analysis and Mendelian randomization study. 2025 All outcomes | August 2024 | 10 | Not applicable |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.