SynthesisBMJ clinical evidence2011
Spontaneous pneumothorax.
Synthesis in BMJ clinical evidence, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Automatic and efficient pneumothorax segmentation from CT images using EFA-Net with feature alignment function.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Deep Learning-Based Computer-Aided Pneumothorax Detection Using Chest X-ray Images.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Automated segmentation and diagnosis of pneumothorax on chest X-rays with fully convolutional multi-scale ScSE-DenseNet: a retrospective study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2020Article
- Effective Pneumothorax Detection for Chest X-Ray Images Using Local Binary Pattern and Support Vector Machine.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2018Article
- Chest tube drainage versus needle aspiration for primary spontaneous pneumothorax: which is better?Journal of thoracic disease · 2017Article
- Management of Primary Spontaneous Pneumothorax: A Single-center Experience.Saudi journal of medicine & medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe incidence of spontaneous pneumothorax is 24/100,000 a year in men and 9.9/100,000 a year in women in England and Wales. The major contributing factor is smoking, which increases the likelihood by 22 times in men, and by 8 times in women. While death from spontaneous pneumothorax is rare, rates of recurrence are high, with one study of men in the USA finding a total recurrence rate of 35%. METHODS AND OUTCOMES: We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments in people presenting with spontaneous pneumothorax? What are the effects of interventions to prevent recurrence in people with previous spontaneous pneumothorax? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to January 2010 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
resultsWe found 17 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
conclusionsIn this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: chest-tube drainage (alone or plus suction), chest tubes (small, standard sizes, one-way valves), needle aspiration, and pleurodesis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21477390PMC3275306What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.