ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2020
The Role of Secondary Brain Insults in Status Epilepticus: A Systematic Review.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- ER and doctors' preparedness to manage status epilepticus: a multi-institutional survey from the Gaza Strip.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Association between the Cardiac Arrest Hospital Prognosis (CAHP) score and reason for death after successfully resuscitated cardiac arrest.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background: Little is known about the impact of pathophysiological mechanisms that underlie the enhancement of excitotoxicity and the neuronal consequences of status epilepticus (SE), as well as the clinical consequences of secondary brain insults (SBI) in patients with SE on outcome; (2) Methods: Electronic searches were conducted in May 2020 using Medline via PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar (#CRD42019139092). Experimental studies of animals or randomized, observational, controlled trials of patients with SE in indexed journals were included. There were no language or date restrictions for the published literature included in this review. Information was extracted on study design, sample size, SBI characteristics, and primary and secondary outcomes, including the timing of evaluation; (3) Results: Among the 2209 articles responding to our inclusion criteria, 56 were included in this systematic review. There are numerous experimental data reporting the deleterious effects associated with each of the SBI in animals exposed to SE. In humans, only the effect of target temperature management in hypothermia (32-34 °C) has been explored. (4) Conclusions: There is little experimental evidence that favors the control of secondary brain insult after SE. Further studies are required to assess the neuroprotective interest of secondary brain insult control after SE in humans.
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.