ArticleThe Journal of craniofacial surgery
Discussion on: "Let's Smarten Up: Smart Devices and the Internet of Things, an Untapped Resource for Innovation in Craniofacial Surgery".
Article in The Journal of craniofacial surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prior to Dr. Paul Tessier's teachings in the 1960's, many neurosurgeons and craniofacial surgeons took shortcuts and employed alloplastic materials fraught with complication, and soon thereafter, both surgical specialties moved the pendulum towards the side of bone grafts being the gold standard for neurosurgical reconstruction and the art of cranioplasty. But now half a century later, neuroplastic surgery is moving the pendulum the other way. Without a doubt, the brain is a critical organ that needs some form of modulation as opposed to replacement. The intervention delivered can be in the form of electricity, light, medicine, etc. Regardless of the medium, it needs to be housed somewhere. And there is no better real estate than to be housed within a sterile alloplastic case with embedded smart technologies; in a way that prevents obvious, visual deformity. For example, it would be naïve to think that the future of embedded neurotechnologies will one day be housed safely and dependably within one's own bone flap. Hence, moving forward, time-tested alloplastic materials will become the new gold standard for cranioplasty reconstruction as the world starts to welcome a generation of smart cranial devices; some of which may house Bluetooth-connected, Wifi-enabled, MRI-compatible pumps to perform convection-enhanced delivery of time-tested medicines - thereby forever changing the way we approach chronic neurological disease and the forever-obstructing, blood-brain barrier. As this happens, I feel confident saying that both Tessier and Cushing are somewhere applauding and smiling on these efforts.
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.