Trial reportThe Journal of laryngology and otology2025
Comparing the post-operative outcomes of two extra-oral surgical approaches for sialoadenectomy: a randomised case-control study.
Trial report in The Journal of laryngology and otology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to compare the outcome of the standard trans-cervical approach and modified trans-cervical approach regarding cosmesis and complications outcomes in a tertiary hospital in Nigeria.
methodsIn this study, 25 patients with submandibular salivary gland lesions adjudged not to be malignant neoplasia were included. They were randomised into the two groups by balloting method.
resultsTwelve (48 per cent) patients had the traditional transcervical approach while 13 (52per cent) had the modified approach. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of general complication, transient paresthesia and wound infection (
conclusionsThough by observation the modified trans-cervical approach was superior to the standard trans-cervical approach, the differences were statistically insignificant.
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.