Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30353304›Full record

SynthesisNeuropsychology review2018

A Systematic Review of Cognitive Outcomes in Angiographically Negative Subarachnoid Haemorrhage.

Tom Burke, Stephanie Hughes, Alan Carr, Mohsen Javadpour, Niall Pender

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neuropsychology review, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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.

Tom BurkeDepartment of Psychology, Beaumont Hospital, Beaumont Road, Dublin 9, Ireland. burket2@tcd.ie.ORCID 0000-0002-6563-1597
Stephanie HughesDepartment of Psychology, Beaumont Hospital, Beaumont Road, Dublin 9, Ireland.
Alan CarrSchool of Psychology, John Henry Newman Building, University College Dublin, Stilorgan Road, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.
Mohsen JavadpourAcademic Unit of Neurology, Trinity Biomedical Sciences Institute, Pearse Street, Dublin 2, Ireland.
Niall PenderDepartment of Psychology, Beaumont Hospital, Beaumont Road, Dublin 9, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical outcomes, including performance on cognitive assessment, in patients with angiographically negative subarachnoid haemorrhage (anSAH) are often interpreted as benign with a good prognostic trajectory. However, diffuse cognitive deficits have been reported within this patient cohort resulting from anSAH, albeit to a lesser extent when compared to other neurovascular events. We consider cognitive outcomes in relation to anSAH to systematically review reported deficits, with a view to quantify and categorise cognitive impairment in this cohort. Anxiety and depression were also included within this review, provided they were assessed alongside cognitive function. Performance deficits in attention and executive function are commonly reported, with set-shifting and interference tasks most commonly impaired in patients. Non-executive cognitive functions are negatively implicated also. Clinical implications and hypotheses relating to the source of these deficits are discussed. This review was formally registered with PROSPERO (CRD42017075294).

Indexed as

Cognitive DysfunctionHumansSubarachnoid HemorrhageAngiographically negative subarachnoid HaemorrhageCognitionNeuropsychologyNon-aneurysmal subarachnoid HaemorrhagePerimesencephalic subarachnoid HaemorrhageSubarachnoid Haemorrhage of unknown originSubarachnoid hemorrhage

Identifiers

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.