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. 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.
    2. 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.
    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. Marta Regina Cezar-Vaz & Laurelize Pereira Rocha & Clarice Alves Bonow & Mara Regina Santos Da Silva & Joana Cezar Vaz & Letícia Silveira Cardoso, 2012. "Risk Perception and Occupational Accidents: A Study of Gas Station Workers in Southern Brazil," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-16, July.
    5. 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.
    6. Kevin Fox Gotham & Richard Campanella & Katie Lauve‐Moon & Bradford Powers, 2018. "Hazard Experience, Geophysical Vulnerability, and Flood Risk Perceptions in a Postdisaster City, the Case of New Orleans," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(2), pages 345-356, February.
    7. 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.
    8. Mei‐Chih Meg Tseng & Yi‐Ping Lin & Fu‐Chang Hu & Tsun‐Jen Cheng, 2013. "Risks Perception of Electromagnetic Fields in Taiwan: The Influence of Psychopathology and the Degree of Sensitivity to Electromagnetic Fields," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(11), pages 2002-2012, November.
    9. Sachse, Katharina & Jungermann, Helmut & Belting, Julia M., 2012. "Investment risk – The perspective of individual investors," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 437-447.
    10. 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.
    11. Claudia Freivogel & Vivianne H. M. Visschers, 2020. "Understanding the Underlying Psychosocial Determinants of Safe Food Handling among Consumers to Mitigate the Transmission Risk of Antimicrobial-Resistant Bacteria," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-19, April.
    12. Jianhua Xu & Shiwei Fan & Jiakun Zheng, 2025. "Valuing mortality risk reductions in the time of COVID-19: A stated-preference analysis," Post-Print hal-04909840, HAL.
    13. Md Mostafizur Rahman & Irtifa Alam Nabila & Mohammed Sadman Sakib & Nusrat Jahan Silvia & Muhammad Abdullahil Galib & Ifta Alam Shobuj & Lamia Hasan & Musabber Ali Chisty & Farzana Rahman & Abu Reza M, 2022. "Status and Individual View toward Lightning among University Students of Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-18, July.
    14. 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.
    15. Marion de Vries & Liesbeth Claassen & Marcel Mennen & Aura Timen & Margreet J. M. te Wierik & Danielle R. M. Timmermans, 2019. "Public Perceptions of Contentious Risk: The Case of Rubber Granulate in the Netherlands," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-16, June.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Agathe Backer‐Grøndahl & Aslak Fyhri & Pål Ulleberg & Astrid Helene Amundsen, 2009. "Accidents and Unpleasant Incidents: Worry in Transport and Prediction of Travel Behavior," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(9), pages 1217-1226, September.
    19. I‐Hui Chen & Shih‐Min Hsu & Jiunn‐Shyan Julian Wu & Yu‐Tsang Wang & Yen‐Kuang Lin & Min‐Huey Chung & Pin‐Hsuan Huang & Nae‐Fang Miao, 2019. "Determinants of nurses’ willingness to receive vaccines: Application of the health belief model," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(19-20), pages 3430-3440, October.
    20. Janneke De Jonge & Hans Van Trijp & Reint Jan Renes & Lynn Frewer, 2007. "Understanding Consumer Confidence in the Safety of Food: Its Two‐Dimensional Structure and Determinants," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 729-740, June.

    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.