ArticleNeurosurgical review2022
Validation of the anterior skull base questionnaire 35 in endoscopic pituitary adenoma surgery.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 2022. 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.
- Endoscopic supraorbital eyebrow approach versus microscopic subfrontal approach for anterior cranial fossa tumor excision: A comparative study of surgical outcome and quality of life.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
- Validation of the Persian version of anterior skull base questionnaire in patients undergoing endoscopic transnasal transsphenoidal surgery.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Validation of the Arabic Version of Anterior Skull Base Questionnaire 35 (AVQ-35) in Endoscopic Endonasal Resection.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient quality of life (QOL) is an important metric of surgical success. To guide therapeutic advances in pituitary adenoma surgery, a validated, comprehensive instrument to quantify QOL is required. We aim to evaluate the validity of the 35 item anterior skull base questionnaire (ASBQ-35) in patients undergoing pituitary adenoma surgery. A total of 168 patients undergoing endoscopic resection of pituitary adenomas underwent longitudinal QOL assessment using the ASBQ-35 and the 22-item Sinonasal Outcomes Test (SNOT-22) over the first postoperative year. Validity of the ASBQ-35 was assessed by internal consistency, test-retest reliability, responsiveness to clinical change, and concurrent validity with the SNOT-22. Internal consistency of the ASBQ-35 was excellent, with a Cronbach's alpha > 0.95 across all timepoints. Test-retest reliability between 3 and 6 months (ICC = 0.82, p < 0.001) and 6 months and 12 months (ICC = 0.78, p < 0.001) was robust. Concurrent validity with SNOT-22 was strong across all timepoints (absolute Pearson r ≥ 0.63, p < 0.001). Mean ASBQ-35 scores were significantly worse at 3 weeks compared to preoperative baseline (mean difference - 0.28, p < 0.01); however, by 12 months, scores had significantly improved (mean difference + 0.24, p < 0.01), indicating that the scale is responsive to clinical change. Each of the 6 domains of the ASBQ, and all 35 component questions, contributed to the discriminative of the ASBQ to measure QOL during the first postoperative year. The ASBQ-35 is a valid, comprehensive tool for assessing QOL after endoscopic pituitary adenoma surgery. Each component of the ASBQ-35 contributed to the overall assessment of QOL during the first postoperative year.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36482220What 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.