ArticleMedicine2017
Incidence of malignant hyperthermia in patients undergoing general anesthesia: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Propofol-Induced Masseter Muscle Spasm in a Woman with a Major Depressive Disorder.Anesthesiology and pain medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMalignant hyperthermia (MH) continues to be of potential concern for clinicians whenever inhalational anesthetic agents or succinylcholine are used, because MH is a potentially fatal metabolic disorder.
methodsA systematic and comprehensive search will be performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Google Scholar, for studies published up to November 2017. Peer-reviewed prospective cohort studies, retrospective cohort studies, and cross-sectional studies or reports issued by government organizations reporting the incidence or prevalence of MH will be eligible for inclusion. The quality of included studies will be assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the modified risk of bias tool. Heterogeneity of estimates across studies as well as publication bias will be assessed. This systematic review and meta-analysis will be performed according to the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. All statistical analyses will be conducted using the Stata SE version 15.0.
resultsThe results of this systematic review and meta-analysis will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.
conclusionTo our knowledge, this systematic review and meta-analysis will be the first to evaluate existing research on the incidence of MH. Our study will provide an overall estimate of the incidence of MH. Subgroup analysis will assess the incidence of MH according to age, gender, geographical region, race, and the provoking agent if possible. The review will benefit patients, healthcare providers, and policymakers. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval and informed consent are not required, as the study will be a literature review and will not involve direct contact with patients or alterations to patient care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The protocol for this review has been registered in the PROSPERO network (registration number: CRD42017076628).
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.