SynthesisPloS one2025
Can cognitive function tests discriminate between patients with glioma and healthy controls prior to treatment? A systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBrain tumours affect 7 per 100,000 people in the UK, glioma being most prevalent, with only 12% five-year survival rates and devastating impacts. Primary care triage tools could facilitate earlier detection of glioma. One option for triage is cognitive function testing. The aim of this systematic review was to determine if cognitive function tests can discriminate between patients with glioma and healthy controls, and their potential suitability for primary care use.
methodsStudies were included that conducted cognitive function tests with adult patients with glioma, prior to treatment, compared to healthy controls. Two independent researchers performed screening and data extraction. The primary outcome explored test discrimination between people with glioma and healthy controls.
resultsSeventeen studies were identified. Findings indicated multiple cognitive function and language function have potential discriminatory capacity between patients with glioma and healthy controls. Over half of cognitive function tests measuring multiple cognitive functions (59%, n = 17) and language function (54%, n = 30) found significant differences between patients with glioma and healthy controls with medium or large effect size. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment has short test duration, high feasibility and acceptability, suggesting potential primary care suitability. Further acceptability and feasibility studies are needed for other potential tests.
conclusionsAcknowledging high heterogeneity of included studies, this review suggests tests of multiple cognitive functions or language could support primary care practitioners with decision-making for urgent neuroimaging referral. However, interpretations should be treated with caution and the applicability to primary care requires further exploration. Prospero registration number: CRD42023408671.
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.