ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association2026
Current practice patterns among Indian neurologists in the Evaluation and management of Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus: A nationwide cross-sectional survey.
Article in Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 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.
- Current practice patterns among Indian neurologists in the Evaluation and management of Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus: A nationwide cross-sectional survey.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis cross-sectional study explores the diagnostic and management practices of normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) in India.
methodsA 16-question online survey based on the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys checklist was disseminated via closed social media and academic groups.
resultsA total of 59 neurologists responded. There was significant variability in how the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) tap test (TT) was implemented. Although 95% of practitioners performed a CSF TT before referring patients for surgery, there were differences in the volume of CSF removed, the assessment tools used, thresholds, and the timing of post-test evaluations. Notably, 36% of neurologists relied on subjective assessment instead of objective scoring to determine CSF TT responsiveness. One-third still considered surgical referral even if the CSF TT was negative, especially when imaging was strongly suggestive of the diagnosis.
conclusionThis study highlights considerable heterogeneity in the evaluation of NPH in India. We need evidence-based practice parameters to ensure accurate diagnosis, informed treatment decisions, and improved patient outcomes.
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.