ArticleBMJ open2024
Eyelid sebaceous gland carcinoma: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinicopathological studies of prevalence.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. 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.
- Cholesterol metabolism dysregulation in eyelid sebaceous gland carcinoma and its clinical significance.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Histopathological spectrum of ocular masses in a tertiary eye center in Northern China: a 12-year retrospective analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Impact of clinicopathological features of meibomian gland adenocarcinoma on the outcomes of surgical resection combined with eyelid reconstruction.American journal of cancer research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSebaceous gland carcinoma (SGC) of the eyelid is an aggressive tumour with the ability to metastasise and an increased morbidity. Controversies regarding the epidemiology of this malignant eyelid tumour is widespread in the scientific literature. Western reports repeatedly describes eyelid SGC as a rare occurring tumour in general, accounting for 1%-3% of all eyelid tumours, however studies from Asia have uncovered a higher frequency of eyelid SGC including 54% of all eyelid tumours in Japan, and 43%-56% in India. We wish to retrieve observational data of eyelid SGC prevalence in proportion to total eyelid tumours, from pathological studies published worldwide to resolve this controversy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search Ovid Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus and Google Scholar to identify published reports on eyelid SGC prevalence proportions, aiming to clarify the incidence of the tumour. We will include observational clinicopathological studies reporting prevalence with confirmed histopathology. No limitations on publication date or language will be applied. Data from the individual studies and study quality will be extracted by two individual reviewers. Study quality will be assessed using the JBI Critical Appraisal Instrument for Studies Reporting Prevalence Data. Raw proportions will be transformed and pooled using a random effects model for meta-analysis. And subgroup analysis according to geography will be performed. If data are deemed unsuitable for a meta-analysis, a narrative synthesis will be presented. We will judge the certainty of evidence and present whether this has an overall effect on the results. The results may shed light on a long-standing academic disparity of the scientific literature. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This systematic review does not require ethical approval. The results of this proposed review will be the subject to a publication in an international peer-reviewed journal within the ophthalmic or pathological specialty. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023487141.
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.