Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24550545›Full record

ReviewAmerican journal of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias2014

Diagnosis and prognosis in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus.

Sayantani Ghosh, Carol Lippa

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in American journal of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers profile of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2018
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sayantani GhoshDepartment of Neurology, Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA 87sayantani@gmail.com.
Carol LippaDepartment of Neurology, Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Drexel University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) is a communicating hydrocephalus, of unknown pathophysiology, characterized by the classical triad of dementia, urinary incontinence, and ataxia. The most popular treatment option is shunt surgery, although it is not a cure. The diagnosis of the disorder is challenging as it may mimic a lot of other neurological conditions and has no distinct biomarker. It becomes even more challenging as majority of the cases are diagnosed by invasive cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) removal tests. However, a careful history taking, a keen and detailed physical examination, and pertinent imaging studies can lead to an early diagnosis. The gait symptoms respond the most to surgery. The predictors deciding the postsurgical prognosis has been discussed. Improved shunting modalities and novel shunt materials with valve adjustments have improved the precision of the shunting procedures. Still we have lot more to achieve in terms of early diagnosis and definitive management of iNPH.

Indexed as

BiomarkersDiagnosis, DifferentialDiagnostic ImagingDiureticsEarly DiagnosisHumansHydrocephalus, Normal PressureNeuropsychological TestsPrognosisSensitivity and SpecificitySpinal PunctureVentriculoperitoneal ShuntBiomarkersDiureticsbiomarkeridiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalusimagingLP shuntprognosisVP shunt

Identifiers

PMID24550545
PMCPMC10852782
OpenAlexW2328254252

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.