Erratum to: Retrospective analysis of treatment outcome of pediatric ependymomas in Korea: analysis of Korean multi-institutional data

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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Surgery for spinal intramedullary tumors: technique, outcome and factors affecting resectability.Neurosurgical review · 2018
   Article
2. Treatment patterns of children with spine and spinal cord tumors: national outcomes and review of the literature.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2017
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Erratum for
  Retrospective analysis of treatment outcome of pediatric ependymomas in Korea: analysis of Korean multi-institutional data.2013

Authors and funding

16 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract