Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23440839›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2013

Multidisciplinary rehabilitation after primary brain tumour treatment.

Fary Khan, Bhasker Amatya, Louisa Ng, Kate Drummond, John Olver

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation after primary brain tumour treatment.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Rehabilitation Outcomes for Patients with Motor Deficits after Initial and Repeat Brain Tumor Surgery.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Fary KhanDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Royal Park Campus, Melbourne, Australia. fary.khan@mh.org.au.
Bhasker Amatya
Louisa Ng
Kate Drummond
John Olver

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBrain tumours can cause significant disability, which may be amenable to multidisciplinary rehabilitation. However, the evidence base for this is unclear.

objectivesTo assess the effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation in adults after primary brain tumour treatment, especially the types of approaches that are effective (settings, intensity) and the outcomes that are affected. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register (March week 2, 2012), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2012), MEDLINE (1966 to March week 2, 2012), EMBASE (1980 to March week 2, 2012), PEDro (1982 to March 2012) and LILACS (1982 to March week 2, 2012). We checked the bibliographies of papers identified and contacted the authors and known experts in the field to seek published and unpublished trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Controlled clinical trials (randomised and non-randomised clinical trials) that compared multidisciplinary rehabilitation in primary brain tumour with either routinely available local services or lower levels of intervention, or studies that compared multidisciplinary rehabilitation in different settings or at different levels of intensity. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently assessed study quality, extracted data and performed a 'best evidence' synthesis based on methodological quality. MAIN

resultsNo randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled clinical trials (CCTs) were identified. AUTHORS'

conclusionsNo RCTs or CCTs were available for synthesis of 'best evidence' for multidisciplinary rehabilitation after treatment for brain tumour patients. However, this does not suggest the ineffectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation but rather highlights the challenges in trial design and rigour, outcome measurement and complexities of care in this population. For completeness of literature, 12 observational studies (with high risk of bias) involving patients with brain tumours were included. These studies provided 'very low level' evidence suggesting that multidisciplinary rehabilitation (inpatient, home-based) may improve functional outcomes, and ambulatory programmes (outpatient and home-based) may improve vocation and quality of life. These conclusions are tentative at best, given gaps in current research in this area. Further research is needed into appropriate and robust study designs, outcome measurement, caregiver needs, evaluation of optimal settings, type, intensity, duration of therapy, and cost-effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation in the brain tumour population.

Indexed as

AdultBrain NeoplasmsCombined Modality TherapyHumansQuality of Life

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.