ReviewFrontiers in radiology2026
Anatomical characteristics of the styloid process associated with internal carotid artery dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials.
Review in Frontiers in radiology, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Internal carotid artery dissection (ICA-D) is an important cause of stroke in adults. The styloid process (SP) may be associated with ICA-D due to potential (micro)trauma resulting from its close anatomical proximity to the internal carotid artery (ICA). The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis is to investigate the association between SP characteristics -particularly SP-ICA distance - and ICA-D. Methods: A systematic review was conducted across six databases to identify observational studies comparing ICA-D patients to controls. The primary outcome of interest was the association between SP-ICA distance and ICA-D. Secondary outcomes included associations between ICA-D and the SP length or angulation. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed, including a subgroup analysis of moderate/high-quality studies. Effect sizes were expressed as standardized mean differences (SMD, Hedges' g). Results: Six studies were included in the systematic review, of which five were eligible in the meta-analysis. The pooled analysis of all five case-control studies (270 ICA-D patients and 377 controls) showed no significant difference in SP-ICA distance (SMD = -0.92, Conclusion: A shorter SP-ICA distance was associated with ICA-D, whereas no significant associations were observed for SP length or angulation. However, the available evidence remains limited and heterogeneous. Systematic Review Registration: CRD42024582594.
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.