ArticleNeurosurgical review2024
Comment on, "Differential DNA methylation associated with delayed cerebral ischemia after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a systematic review".
Article in Neurosurgical review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. 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
- Retraction · 2025-01-29Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Computer-Aided Content or Computer-Generated Content ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The article "Differential DNA Methylation Associated with Delayed Cerebral Ischemia after Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review" by Tomasz Klepinowski et al. offers an in-depth analysis of the relationship between DNA methylation and delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) following aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). By systematically reviewing databases like PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science, the authors identify key genes, including ITPR3, HAMP, INSR, and CDHR5, as potential biomarkers for early DCI diagnosis. Their meticulous adherence to PRISMA guidelines and the STROBE statement for quality assessment enhances the study's credibility. However, the review could be improved by discussing methodological variability, statistical power, and the functional relevance of identified CpG sites. Additional sections on mechanistic pathways, integration with other omics data, clinical translation, and ethical considerations would further strengthen the review, providing a more comprehensive understanding of epigenetic factors in DCI and paving the way for future therapeutic interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39311972What 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.