Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33924372›Full record

ReviewCancers2021

Meningiomas and Cognitive Impairment after Treatment: A Systematic and Narrative Review.

Renato Gondar, Gildas Patet, Karl Schaller, Torstein R Meling

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Meningiomas with CNS invasion.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Renato GondarNeurosurgical Division, Department of Neurosciences, Geneva University Hospitals, 1206 Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-6291-0347
Gildas PatetNeurosurgical Division, Department of Neurosciences, Geneva University Hospitals, 1206 Geneva, Switzerland.
Karl SchallerNeurosurgical Division, Department of Neurosciences, Geneva University Hospitals, 1206 Geneva, Switzerland.
Torstein R MelingNeurosurgical Division, Department of Neurosciences, Geneva University Hospitals, 1206 Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-6595-0873
University Hospital of Geneva · CHUniversity of Geneva · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical outcomes after surgery for intracranial meningiomas might be overvalued as cognitive dimensions and quality of life are probably underreported. This review aims to summarize the current state of cognitive screening and treatment-related outcomes after meningioma surgery. We present a systematic review (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA-P) 2015-based) of cognitive outcomes after intracranial meningioma surgery. A total of 1572 patients (range 9-261) with a mean age of 58.4 years (range 23-87), and predominantly female (

Indexed as

attentioncognitionexecutive functionlanguagememorymeningiomaneuropsychologyprognosis

Identifiers

PMID33924372
PMCPMC8070481
OpenAlexW3155961059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.