ArticleMedicine2021
Risk factors for anterior communicating artery aneurysm rupture: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Polidocanol in Sclerotherapy for Lymphovenous Disorders: Mechanisms, Clinical Uses, and Future Prospects.Drugs · 2026Review
- Interpretable machine learning model for predicting rupture risk in anterior communicating artery aneurysms.Neurosurgical review · 2026Review
- Circulation remodeling after flow diversion of an anterior communicating artery aneurysm: A case report.Journal of cerebrovascular and endovascular neurosurgery · 2023Article
- Clinical and Morphological Factors for Ruptured Anterior Communicating Artery Aneurysms.Vascular health and risk management · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough the research on the risk factors of anterior communicating artery (AComA) aneurysm has made great progress, the independent effect of each risk factor on the rupture of AComA aneurysm is controversial among different studies. We will perform a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate risk factors for AComA aneurysm rupture and quantify their independent effects.
methodsA systematic search according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases was conducted from inception to August 31, 2021 for published studies concerning risk factors for AComA aneurysm rupture. In the absence of statistical heterogeneity (ie, P > .10 and I2 < 50%), we will use a fixed-effects model to pool the results across sufficient studies. Otherwise, we will present the results employing the random-effects model. Quality assessment of the included studies will be evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Statistical analyses will be performed using Stata16 (Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA) software.
resultsThe findings of this study will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals for publication.
conclusionThis systematic review will provide evidence to determine the risk factors that affect the rupture of the AComA aneurysm and quantify their independent effects. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Since the proposed study uses pre-published data, ethical approval is not required. REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021284262. (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/).
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.