ArticleBrain & spine2025
Recommendations of the EANS Global and Humanitarian Neurosurgery Committee for sustainable neurosurgical partnerships in low-resource settings.
Article in Brain & spine, 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
26 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite growing interest in global neurosurgery, equitable access to neurosurgical care in low- and middle income countries (LMICs) remains limited. European-led collaborations have received little attention, and practical guidance for initiating and maintaining partnerships is lacking. Research question: This study aimed to develop a set of consensus recommendations to guide sustainable neurosurgical partnerships between European institutions and partners in LMICs. Material and methods: Following a prospective qualitative study involving 14 neurosurgeons- seven from European institutions and seven from LMIC partners, key factors for successful institutional partnerships were identified. Evidence was synthesized into an initial list of 31 recommendations. Following consensus discussions at the 2024 EANS Congress and additional expert validation, 22 final recommendations were established. Results: Recommendations were organized into three phases: initiation, development, and maintenance. Key elements for initiation include building mutual trust, avoiding paternalistic dynamics, engaging local institutions, and defining shared goals. Development-focused recommendations highlight the importance of context-adapted, in-person training, bidirectional knowledge exchange, and inclusive program design. Long-term maintenance emphasizes self-sufficiency, equipment sustainability, continuous communication, and equity. A structured rating process ensured that each recommendation achieved at least 70% consensus among experts. Implementation insights were included as a supplement. Discussion and conclusions: This study presents the first structured, evidence-based recommendations tailored explicitly to European-LMIC neurosurgical collaborations. Emphasizing equity, sustainability, and local ownership, these guidelines offer a framework for future partnerships and may be relevant across other global health disciplines. Future validation in real-world settings will help refine their applicability and broaden their impact.
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.