ArticlePloS one2015
The incidence of double hypoglossal canal in Japanese: evaluation with multislice computed tomography.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Duplicated hypoglossal canal prevalence in a fetal and infantile population: neurosurgical considerations.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2026Article
- Anatomical variability of the hypoglossal dural pori and canal: double hypoglossal dural porus is the main anatomical configuration in the German population.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2025Article
- Hypoglossal canal: an osteological and morphometric study on a collection of dried skulls in an Italian population: clinical implications.European journal of medical research · 2023Article
- Article
- Reappraisal of the types of hypoglossal canal: endocranial approach.Anatomical science international · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeDouble hypoglossal canal, namely a hypoglossal canal bridging, is a normal variation of the hypoglossal canal. Racial differences in the prevalence of double hypoglossal canal have been reported. We evaluated the prevalence of double hypoglossal canal in a Japanese population with multidetector computed tomography (MDCT). MATERIALS AND
methodsWe reviewed five hundred and ninety consecutive patients (mean age, 61 years: range, 15-94 years: 254 men, 336 women) who underwent computed tomographic angiography (CTA) of the brain for a variety of CNS abnormalities. Two radiologists achieved consensus on the canal being single or double, and measured the sizes of single canals on CT images. Kappa statistics was used to test the reliability between the 2 investigators. A logistic regression was used to evaluate the prevalence of double hypoglossal canal and the following factors: sex, age, and laterality. Student's t-test was used to evaluate the asymmetry of single hypoglossal canal diameters. Statistical significance was accepted at P < 0.05.
resultsDouble hypoglossal canal was identified in 16.9% of the patients, and was bilateral in 2.2%. Double hypoglossal canal was significantly more frequent on the left side than right (P = 0.004, odds ratio = 1.79) and in males than females (P = 0.011, odds ratio = 1.67). A larger left or right-sided canal was found in 31.6% and 12.2% of the patients, respectively, following the same side preference as that of double hypoglossal canal. Almost perfect agreement was achieved between the two readers (k = 0.975).
conclusionsIn this Japanese population, the prevalence of a double hypoglossal canal was 16.9%, of which 2.2% were bilateral. Double hypoglossal canal was more frequent in males than females, and on the left side than right.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.