ReviewClinical medicine (London, England)2018
Hyperacute management of intracerebral haemorrhage.
Review in Clinical medicine (London, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of Diagnostic Support Software for Phase Estimation of Intracerebral Hemorrhage Using Multi-sequence Magnetic Resonance Imaging.Neurologia medico-chirurgica · 2026Article
- Dynamic changes in chromatin accessibility within one month of mouse intracerebral hemorrhage.iScience · 2025Article
- Systematic Review of Prehospital Prediction Models for Identifying Intracerebral Haemorrhage in Suspected Stroke Patients.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- Kurarinone alleviates hemin-induced neuroinflammation and microglia-mediated neurotoxicity by shifting microglial M1/M2 polarization via regulating the IGF1/PI3K/Akt signaling.The Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences · 2022Article
- Baseline factors associated with early and late death in intracerebral haemorrhage survivors.European journal of neurology · 2020Observational
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intracerebral haemorrhage causes 1 in 10 strokes, but has the worst overall outcomes of all stroke subtypes. Baseline haematoma volume is a key prognostic factor and early complications - such as haematoma expansion, obstructive hydrocephalus and perihaematomal oedema - may worsen outcome. There is evidence that withdrawal of care may occur more often in intracerebral haemorrhage than ischaemic stroke independent of premorbid health and stroke severity. However, recent evidence shows that reversal of anticoagulants, intensive blood pressure lowering and surgery in carefully selected cases may improve outcomes. Ongoing research may also provide evidence for new medical treatments and minimally invasive approaches to surgery. Effective implementation of evidence-based care to intracerebral haemorrhage patients can be difficult but quality improvement methodology can help to achieve maximal benefit.
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.