SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2021
Surgical vs. Conservative Management for Lobar Intracerebral Hemorrhage, a Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Modality-projection universal model for comprehensive full-body medical imaging segmentation.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Surgical Versus Conservative Management of Supratentorial ICH: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis (2017-2023).Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Inpatient Rehabilitation Outcomes after Primary Severe Haemorrhagic Stroke: A Retrospective Study Comparing Surgical versus Non-Surgical Management.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOutcomes regarding the conventional surgical and conservative treatment for the lobar intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) have not been previously compared. The current meta-analysis was designed to review and compile the evidence regarding the management of patients with lobar intracerebral hemorrhage.
methodsOnline electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Studies were selected on the basis of the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Trials with CT-confirmed lobar intracerebral hemorrhage patients of which treatment regimen was started within 72 h following the stroke were included. Low quality trials were excluded. Death or dependence was defined as primary outcome and death at the end of the follow up was the secondary outcome.
resultsOne hundred five RCTs were screened and 96 articles were excluded on the basis of abstract. Nine articles were assessed for the eligibility and 7 trials were included that involved 1,102 patients. The Odds ratio (OR) for the primary outcome was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.62-1.04,
conclusionOur findings suggested that surgical treatments did not significantly improve the functional outcome as compared with the conservative medical management for patients with lobar ICH.
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.