Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27356649›Full record

ReviewNeurosciences (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia)2016

Evidence-based neurosurgery. Basic concepts for the appraisal and application of scientific information to patient care (Part II).

Ignatius N Esene, Saleh S Baeesa, Ahmed Ammar

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neurosciences (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Spinal gunshot wounds: A systematic review of the literature.North American Spine Society journal · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Randomized controlled trials in neurosurgery.Surgical neurology international · 2022
    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

3 authors.

Ignatius N EseneDepartment of Neurosurgery, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt. E-mail: ignatiusesene@yahoo.co.uk.
Saleh S Baeesa
Ahmed Ammar

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Medical evidence is obtainable from approaches, which might be descriptive, analytic and integrative and ranked into levels of evidence, graded according to quality and summarized into strengths of recommendation. Sources of evidence range from expert opinions through well-randomized control trials to meta-analyses. The conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions related to the care of individual patients defines the concept of evidence-based neurosurgery (EBN). We reviewed reference books of clinical epidemiology, evidence-based practice and other previously related articles addressing principles of evidence-based practice in neurosurgery. Based on existing theories and models and our cumulative years of experience and expertise conducting research and promoting EBN, we have synthesized and presented a holistic overview of the concept of EBN. We have also underscored the importance of clinical research and its relationship to EBN. Useful electronic resources are provided. The concept of critical appraisal is introduced.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicResearch DesignClinical Decision-MakingEvidence-Based MedicineHumansNeurosurgeryRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID27356649
PMCPMC5107284

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.