ReviewNeurologic clinics2015
Management of unbled brain arteriovenous malformation study.
Review in Neurologic clinics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- 'De Novo' Brain AVMs-Hypotheses for Development and a Systematic Review of Reported Cases.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Pooled it
- Grades of brain arteriovenous malformations and risk of hemorrhage and death.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2019Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In a recent trial limited to arteriovenous malformations discovered not to have bled, medical management was superior to medical management plus intervention. The trial was halted after 226 randomizations and a mean follow-up of 3.3 years owing to a disparity favoring the medical arm. Eligible patients were selected as suitable for lesion eradication. The initial sample size of 800 and follow-up plans for a mean of 7 years were lowered and shortened, respectively, by the outcome data. An application for extended follow-up was given poor priority scores owing to estimations that the disparities in outcomes would not change significantly.
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.