ArticleBMJ open2020
Permeability of the blood-brain barrier through the phases of ischaemic stroke and relation with clinical outcome: protocol for a systematic review.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Therapeutic Nanoparticles for the Different Phases of Ischemic Stroke.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIschaemic stroke is the most prevalent type of stroke and is characterised by a myriad of pathological events triggered by a vascular arterial occlusion. Disruption of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) is a key pathological event that may lead to fatal outcomes. However, it seems to follow a multiphasic pattern that has been associated with distinct biological substrates and possibly contrasting outcomes. Addressing the BBB permeability (BBBP) along the different phases of stroke through imaging techniques could lead to a better understanding of the disease, improved patient selection for specific treatments and development of new therapeutic modalities and delivery methods. This systematic review will aim to comprehensively summarise the existing evidence regarding the evolution of the BBBP values during the different phases of an acute ischaemic stroke and correlate this event with the clinical outcome of the patient. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a computerised search on Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus and Web of Science. In addition, grey literature and ClinicalTrials.gov will be scanned. We will include randomised controlled trials, cohort, cross-sectional and case-controlled studies on humans that quantitatively assess the BBBP in stroke. Retrieved studies will be independently reviewed by two authors and any discrepancies will be resolved by consensus or with a third reviewer. Reviewers will extract the data and assess the risk of bias of the selected studies. If possible, data will be combined in a quantitative meta-analysis following the guidelines provided by Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We will assess cumulative evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not needed. All data used for this work are publicly available. The result obtained from this work will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated in relevant conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019147314.
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.