BVA decisions by condition
Brain hemorrhage: BVA grant rates and what wins
From 2017 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a brain hemorrhage issue in 1,545 decisions. It granted the brain hemorrhage issue in 15.3% of them, below the 19.4% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 28.2%, and remanded it in 55.0%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 35.3% were granted.
Decisions
1,545
2017–2026
Granted
15.3%
All conditions: 19.4%
Granted on the merits
35.3%
Granted ÷ (granted + denied)
Remanded
55.0%
Denied: 28.2%
Brain hemorrhage outcomes by year
| Year | Issues decided | Granted | Denied | Remanded | Other |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 93 | 8.6% | 37.6% | 50.5% | 3.2% |
| 2018 | 199 | 12.1% | 38.2% | 46.7% | 3.0% |
| 2019 | 245 | 9.8% | 33.1% | 55.9% | 1.2% |
| 2020 | 190 | 9.5% | 31.1% | 59.5% | 0.0% |
| 2021 | 185 | 15.7% | 28.1% | 53.0% | 3.2% |
| 2022 | 171 | 14.6% | 17.0% | 67.3% | 1.2% |
| 2023 | 182 | 20.9% | 27.5% | 50.0% | 1.6% |
| 2024 | 129 | 22.5% | 14.0% | 62.0% | 1.6% |
| 2025 | 115 | 25.2% | 20.0% | 53.9% | 0.9% |
| 2026 | 62 | 25.8% | 25.8% | 46.8% | 1.6% |
Each row counts issues (each condition the Board decided), so the shares add up to 100%. Other: dismissed, withdrawn or no clear outcome. Years with fewer than 50 issues are left out.
Evidence in granted and denied brain hemorrhage decisions
For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the brain hemorrhage issue on the merits when the decision mentioned it, compared with decisions that did not. These are associations, not causes, and evidence is recorded per decision, not per issue.
| In the record | Decisions | Granted when present | When absent | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive nexus opinion | 298 | 77.5% | 14.4% | +63.0 pts |
| Claimed as secondary | 879 | 54.9% | 10.2% | +44.7 pts |
| Favorable VA exam | 181 | 68.7% | 27.2% | +41.5 pts |
| Private medical opinion | 518 | 52.8% | 21.0% | +31.8 pts |
| Treating physician opinion | 86 | 60.8% | 33.2% | +27.6 pts |
| Combat service | 78 | 46.7% | 34.7% | +11.9 pts |
| Buddy statement | 45 | 35.0% | 35.3% | −0.3 pts |
| Lay statement | 1,048 | 26.1% | 63.8% | −37.7 pts |
- The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 76.8% of the decisions that granted brain hemorrhage.
- The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 21.5% of grants and 9.2% of denials.
Negative evidence in the record
An unfavorable exam or a negative nexus opinion often sits in the same record as favorable evidence, and the Board weighs them against each other. So these rows show how often brain hemorrhage was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.
| In the record | Decisions | Granted when present | When absent | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Negative nexus opinion | 802 | 36.0% | 34.3% | +1.7 pts |
| Unfavorable VA exam | 1,003 | 34.9% | 36.1% | −1.2 pts |
Why the Board granted or denied brain hemorrhage
Most common reasons in grants
- Caused by the service-connected disability41
- Current diagnosis established26
- Service connection established24
- Secondary service connection granted4
- Criteria for service connection met3
- New and material evidence received to reopen claim3
- No contrary medical evidence3
- VA examiner: less likely than not related to service3
Most common reasons in denials
- No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis70
- Preponderance of the evidence against the claim38
- Service records negative or silent38
- VA examiner: less likely than not related to service33
- No continuity of symptomatology15
- Current diagnosis established13
- No current diagnosis10
- No nexus to service7
Numbers are decisions that gave the reason. Reasons are short phrases extracted by AI from each decision; common wordings of the same reason are grouped. Benefit of the doubt is reported above.
Recent brain hemorrhage decisions
Granted
Secondary to service-connected cardiovascular condition; Due to service-connected cardiovascular condition
Criteria met for entitlement to service connection for right MCA stroke with left-sided hemiplegia and major neurocognitive impairment, secondary to sleep apnea and hypertension.; Residuals of the Veteran's stroke were caused by his service-connected sleep apnea and hypertension.; Benefit of the doubt afforded to the Veteran.
No dispute of current residuals; Service connection for hypertension established; Positive nexus from private and VA opinions linking residuals to hypertension
Denied
No evidence of herbicide exposure; No other basis for service connection found
Service connection for hypertension was denied.; First element of secondary service connection (current disability) met.; Second element (service-connected disability) not met.; Third element (link between service-connected disability and current disability) not met.
No in-service incurrence or relation to service; VA examiner opined less likely than not caused by PFAS/TERA; Strokes likely due to central atherosclerosis and risk factors
Rules that apply to brain hemorrhage claims
- 38 CFR 3.303
Principles of service connection
Read it in VA Law Explorer - 38 CFR 3.310
Secondary service connection and aggravation
Read it in VA Law Explorer - 38 CFR 3.102
Reasonable doubt (benefit of the doubt)
Read it in VA Law Explorer
Research your brain hemorrhage case
Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.
How these numbers are calculated
- Rates count decisions in which the Board decided a brain hemorrhage issue, by the outcome of that issue. Other issues in the same decision can have different outcomes.
- “Granted on the merits” leaves out remands and dismissals. “All conditions” is the grant share across every condition issue in the data.
- The data comes from CaseScribe's AI extraction of public BVA decisions (2017–2026) and can contain errors. It is updated automatically as new decisions are added.