Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25012674›Full record

ReviewAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2014

Spinal fluid biomechanics and imaging: an update for neuroradiologists.

V Haughton, K-A Mardal

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Hydraulic resistance of periarterial spaces in the brain.Fluids and barriers of the CNS · 2019
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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.

V HaughtonFrom the Department of Radiology (V.H.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin haughtonvictor@gmail.com.
K-A MardalCenter for Biological Computing (K.-A.M.), Simula, Lysaker, Norway.
University of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Flow imaging with cardiac-gated phase-contrast MR has applications in the management of neurologic disorders. Together with computational fluid dynamics, phase-contrast MR has advanced our understanding of spinal CSF flow. Phase-contrast MR is used to evaluate patients with Chiari I malformation who are candidates for surgical treatment. In theory, abnormal CSF flow resulting from the abnormal tonsil position causes syringomyelia and other neurologic signs and symptoms in patients with Chiari I. CSF flow imaging also has research applications in syringomyelia and spinal stenosis. To optimize MR acquisition and interpretation, neuroradiologists must have familiarity with healthy and pathologic patterns of CSF flow. The purpose of this review is to update concepts of CSF flow that are important for the practice of flow imaging in the spine.

Indexed as

HydrodynamicsCerebrospinal FluidHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeurologyPhysiciansRadiology

Identifiers

PMID25012674
PMCPMC7966234
OpenAlexW2096191271

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.