ReviewFrontiers in pediatrics2018
Pediatric Central Nervous System Tumors: State-of-the-Art and Debated Aspects.
Review in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pre-operative and intra-operative risk factors of post-operative cerebellar mutism syndrome in pediatric patients undergoing posterior fossa tumor surgery: a systematic review.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2026Pooled it
- Improving final diagnosis in paediatric posterior fossa tumours: Correlation and discrepancy between radiologic diagnosis, intraoperative surgeon's diagnosis, and histopathology.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
- Imaging of pediatric brain tumors: A COG Diagnostic Imaging Committee/SPR Oncology Committee/ASPNR White Paper.Pediatric blood & cancer · 2023Article
- Structural networking of the developing brain: from maturation to neurosurgical implications.Frontiers in neuroanatomy · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pediatric neuro-oncology surgery continues to progress in sophistication, largely driven by advances in technology used to aid the following aspects of surgery: operative planning (advanced MRI techniques including fMRI and DTI), intraoperative navigation [preoperative MRI, intra-operative MRI (ioMRI) and intra-operative ultrasound (ioUS)], tumor visualization (microscopy, endoscopy, fluorescence), tumor resection techniques (ultrasonic aspirator, micro-instruments, micro-endoscopic instruments), delineation of the resection extent (ioMRI, ioUS, and fluorescence), and intraoperative safety (neurophysiological monitoring, ioMRI). This article discusses the aforementioned technological advances, and their multimodal use to optimize safe pediatric neuro-oncology surgery.
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.