ReviewLife (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Quantitative Anatomical Studies in Neurosurgery: A Systematic and Critical Review of Research Methods.
Review in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07287462 (Cranio-spinal Neurosurgical Approaches), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Cranio-spinal Neurosurgical Approaches: Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis and Validation of New Minimally Invasive Methods on Cadaveric Anatomical Models.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reclaiming Anatomy as Method: From Morphological Reasoning to Clinical Relevance.Clinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe anatomy laboratory can provide the ideal setting for the preclinical phase of neurosurgical research. Our purpose is to comprehensively and critically review the preclinical anatomical quantification methods used in cranial neurosurgery.
methodsA systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. The PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and Ovid EMBASE databases were searched, yielding 1667 papers. A statistical analysis was performed using R.
resultsThe included studies were published from 1996 to 2023. The risk of bias assessment indicated high-quality studies. Target exposure was the most studied feature (81.7%), mainly with area quantification (64.9%). The surgical corridor was quantified in 60.9% of studies, more commonly with the quantification of the angle of view (60%). Neuronavigation-based methods benefit from quantifying the surgical pyramid features that define a cranial neurosurgical approach and allowing post-dissection data analyses. Direct measurements might diminish the error that is inherent to navigation methods and are useful to collect a small amount of data.
conclusionQuantifying neurosurgical approaches in the anatomy laboratory provides an objective assessment of the surgical corridor and target exposure. There is currently limited comparability among quantitative neurosurgical anatomy studies; sharing common research methods will provide comparable data that might also be investigated with artificial intelligence methods.
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.