IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0312189.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research on stroke patients’ perception of recurrence risk: A scoping review protocol

Author

Listed:
  • Shanshan Zhu
  • Xueting Sun
  • Xin Guo
  • Meiqi Xu
  • Dingding Li
  • Shuaiyou Wang
  • Yage Shi
  • Chenjun Liu
  • Hongru Wang
  • Huimin Zhang

Abstract

Introduction: Stroke, a major global cause of death and disability, has a high recurrence rate that significantly affects patients’ physical, psychological, and economic well-being. Despite the importance of health risk perception in preventive measures, most stroke patients struggle to accurately assess the risk of recurrence. Current research on stroke recurrence risk perception is still exploratory, with a lack of systematic understanding of the influencing factors. This study aims to comprehensively analyze the current state of stroke recurrence research and the factors that influenced recurrence and assess the effectiveness and limitations of various assessment tools to guide future research and intervention strategies. Methods and analysis: This scoping review will follow Arksey and O’Malley’s methodological framework as well as the updated scoping review methodology guidance by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). Review results will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. The search strategy will be developed via keywords, such as stroke, recurrence risk perception, and influencing factors. We will systematically search seven English databases, PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsycInfo, and MEDLINE, as well as four Chinese databases, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure for Biomedical Literature. Studies published in both English and Chinese will be included. Data will be extracted via a standardized form and summarized through quantitative (frequency) and qualitative analyses (narrative synthesis). Furthermore, the findings will be reported. Ethics and dissemination: Since this review involves collecting data from existing literature and does not involve human participants, ethical approval is not required. Research findings will be disseminated through conference presentations and publications in peer-reviewed journals. Registration details: This protocol has been registered on the Open Science Framework (OSF). Relevant materials and potential following updates are available at https://osf.io/7kq5t.

Suggested Citation

  • Shanshan Zhu & Xueting Sun & Xin Guo & Meiqi Xu & Dingding Li & Shuaiyou Wang & Yage Shi & Chenjun Liu & Hongru Wang & Huimin Zhang, 2024. "Research on stroke patients’ perception of recurrence risk: A scoping review protocol," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(12), pages 1-9, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0312189
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0312189
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0312189
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0312189&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0312189?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Julie Barnett & Glynis M. Breakwell, 2001. "Risk Perception and Experience: Hazard Personality Profiles and Individual Differences," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(1), pages 171-178, February.
    2. Becker, M.H. & Drachman, R.H. & Kirscht, J.P., 1974. "A new approach to explaining sick-role behavior in low-income populations," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 64(3), pages 205-216.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sisira S. Withanachchi & Ilia Kunchulia & Giorgi Ghambashidze & Rami Al Sidawi & Teo Urushadze & Angelika Ploeger, 2018. "Farmers’ Perception of Water Quality and Risks in the Mashavera River Basin, Georgia: Analyzing the Vulnerability of the Social-Ecological System through Community Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-26, August.
    2. Loredana Antronico & Roberto Coscarelli & Francesco De Pascale & Giovanni Gull?, 2018. "La comunicazione del rischio e la percezione pubblica dei disastri: il caso studio della frana di Maierato (Calabria, Italia)," PRISMA Economia - Societ? - Lavoro, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2018(3), pages 9-29.
    3. Nicolás C. Bronfman & Luis Abdón Cifuentes & Michael L. deKay & Henry H. Willis, 2007. "Accounting for Variation in the Explanatory Power of the Psychometric Paradigm: The Effects of Aggregation and Focus," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 527-554, June.
    4. Henry H. Willis & Michael L. DeKay & Baruch Fischhoff & M. Granger Morgan, 2005. "Aggregate, Disaggregate, and Hybrid Analyses of Ecological Risk Perceptions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(2), pages 405-428, April.
    5. Adero Gaudin & Ronda Jackson & Patricia Quinlan & Maureen George, 2023. "Spine Surgery Patients’ Perceptions of Postoperative Pulmonary Complications," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 32(4), pages 797-804, May.
    6. Angelo Panno & Annalisa Theodorou & Giuseppe Alessio Carbone & Evelina De Longis & Chiara Massullo & Gianluca Cepale & Giuseppe Carrus & Claudio Imperatori & Giovanni Sanesi, 2021. "Go Greener, Less Risk: Access to Nature Is Associated with Lower Risk Taking in Different Domains during the COVID-19 Lockdown," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-17, September.
    7. Xie, Jipan & Dow, William H., 2005. "Longitudinal study of child immunization determinants in China," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 601-611, August.
    8. Wim Kellens & Ruud Zaalberg & Tijs Neutens & Wouter Vanneuville & Philippe De Maeyer, 2011. "An Analysis of the Public Perception of Flood Risk on the Belgian Coast," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(7), pages 1055-1068, July.
    9. Ling Tian & Peng Yao & Shi-jie Jiang, 2014. "Perception of earthquake risk: a study of the earthquake insurance pilot area in China," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 74(3), pages 1595-1611, December.
    10. Chayanit Luevanich & Ros Kane & Aimon Naklong & Prapaipim Surachetkomson, 2023. "Perceptions and Intentions around Uptake of the COVID-19 Vaccination among Older People: A Mixed-Methods Study in Phuket Province, Thailand," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(11), pages 1-14, May.
    11. Okumah, Murat & Yeboah, Ata Senior & Bonyah, Sylvester Kwaku, 2020. "What matters most? Stakeholders’ perceptions of river water quality," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    12. Peter Kamstra & Brian Cook & David M. Kennedy & Barbara Brighton, 2018. "Treating risk as relational on shore platforms and implications for public safety on microtidal rocky coasts," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 91(3), pages 1299-1316, April.
    13. Ethan T. Knocke & Korine N. Kolivras, 2007. "Flash Flood Awareness in Southwest Virginia," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1), pages 155-169, February.
    14. Peter Fraser‐Mackenzie & Ming‐Chien Sung & Johnnie E.V. Johnson, 2014. "Toward an Understanding of the Influence of Cultural Background and Domain Experience on the Effects of Risk‐Pricing Formats on Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(10), pages 1846-1869, October.
    15. repec:plo:pone00:0054149 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Daniela Knuth & Doris Kehl & Lynn Hulse & Silke Schmidt, 2014. "Risk Perception, Experience, and Objective Risk: A Cross‐National Study with European Emergency Survivors," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1286-1298, July.
    17. Nicolás C. Bronfman & Luis Abdón Cifuentes & Virna Vaneza Gutiérrez, 2008. "Participant-focused analysis: explanatory power of the classic psychometric paradigm in risk perception," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(6), pages 735-753, September.
    18. Natsuko Tabata & Mai Tsukada & Kozue Kubo & Yuri Inoue & Reiko Miroku & Fumihiko Odashima & Koichiro Shiratori & Takashi Sekiya & Shintaro Sengoku & Hideaki Shiroyama & Hiromichi Kimura, 2022. "Living Lab for Citizens’ Wellness: A Case of Maintaining and Improving a Healthy Diet under the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-17, January.
    19. Vadivelu Thusyanthy, 2018. "Health Consciousness and Brand Equity in the Carbonated Soft Drink Industry in Sri Lanka," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 13(3), pages 188-188, February.
    20. Tomoko Haraoka & Toshiyuki Ojima & Chiyoe Murata & Shinya Hayasaka, 2012. "Factors Influencing Collaborative Activities between Non-Professional Disaster Volunteers and Victims of Earthquake Disasters," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(10), pages 1-8, October.
    21. Julie L. Demuth, 2018. "Explicating Experience: Development of a Valid Scale of Past Hazard Experience for Tornadoes," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(9), pages 1921-1943, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0312189. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.