ArticleFrontiers in neurology
Differential impact of biologically effective dose in distal versus proximal gamma knife targets for trigeminal neuralgia.
Article in Frontiers in neurology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Role of Biological Effective Dose in Gamma Knife Radiosurgery: A Systematic Review Across Multiple Indications.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We report the results of a long-term follow-up series in our center to verify the impact of biologically effective dose (BED) on the efficacy and safety of Gamma Knife radiosurgery (GKS) in the treatment of primary trigeminal neuralgia (TN). A total of 138 consecutive cases of primary TN receiving GKS were included. A 4-mm collimator was used for all cases, and a median central dose of 85 Gy (range 70-90 Gy) was prescribed. The Barrow Neurological Institute Pain Scale was adopted to evaluate the severity of TN. The median follow-up period was 65.5 months (range 12-147 months). Overall, 123 (89.1%) patients eventually achieved effective relief. The influence of BED on treatment outcomes varied by target location. For patients with distal targets, BED was a significant predictor of treatment failure (OR: 0.996, 95% CI: 0.992-0.999,
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.