Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29254262›Full record

ArticleOncotarget2017

Dexmedetomidine versus propofol on the sedation of pediatric patients during magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanning: a meta-analysis of current studies.

Qiang Zhou, Lingli Shen, Xinxian Zhang, Jiong Li, Yong Tang

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Emergence delirium in children: a Brazilian survey.Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)
    Article
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

5 authors.

Qiang Zhou *Department of Radiology, XuZhou Children's Hospital, Xuzhou, Jiangsu 221006, China.
Lingli Shen *Department of Neurology, The Tenth Ward, XuZhou Children's Hospital, Xuzhou, Jiangsu 221006, China.
Xinxian ZhangDepartment of Radiology, XuZhou Children's Hospital, Xuzhou, Jiangsu 221006, China.
Jiong LiDepartment of Radiology, XuZhou Children's Hospital, Xuzhou, Jiangsu 221006, China.
Yong TangDepartment of Radiology, XuZhou Children's Hospital, Xuzhou, Jiangsu 221006, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a widely applied diagnostic approach for detection of pediatric diseases. Sedatives are commonly used to acquire the accurate MRI images. Dexmedetomidine and propofol serve as sole or combined sedatives in pediatric MRI scanning. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy of dexmedetomidine and propofol in children ubdergoing MRI. Pubmed, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched up to June, 2017. Onset of sedation time, recovery time, sedation time, MRI time, MRI quality and emergence delirium were analyzed. 6 studies with 368 subjects were enrolled in this meta-analysis. The pooling data showed that propofol had a shorter onset of sedation time (WMD: 6.05, 95% CI: 3.12 - 8.98,

Indexed as

dexmedetomidinemagnetic resonance imagingmeta-analysispropofolsedation

Identifiers

PMID29254262
PMCPMC5731972

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.