ReviewNeurosurgical review2026
Evolution of randomized controlled trials in adult neurosurgical critical care from 1990 to 2024 in the United States.
Review in Neurosurgical review, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for clinical care. Acute conditions such as traumatic brain injury, intracerebral hemorrhage, aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage, and spinal cord injury are associated with high morbidity and mortality, yet guidelines are based on limited Class I evidence. This study aimed to examine the design, funding, outcomes, and reporting quality of phase III RCTs in neurosurgical critical care published since 1990. MEDLINE and Cochrane Central were searched for phase III RCTs published since January 1, 1990, with at least one arm in the U.S. and published in selected high-impact journals. Eligible studies included adult patients with common critical care neurosurgical pathologies evaluating interventions with clinically relevant outcomes. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data with adjudication by a third. Analyses included χ² tests, ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis tests, and linear regression. Among 586 records screened, 27 phase III RCTs (28,291 patients) met inclusion criteria. Most evaluated medical therapies; only three (11%) assessing surgical interventions. Six trials (22%) demonstrated significant benefit. The modified Rankin Scale or Glasgow Coma Scale were primary endpoints in 74% of studies. Quality-of-life measures were included in 37% but never showed significant improvement. Industry funding (33%) was not associated with positive outcomes (P = .62). Modern CONSORT fulfillment was observed in 22%, improving over time (P = .02). Phase III RCTs in neurosurgical critical care are limited, highlighting the need for greater emphasis on patient-centered outcomes and transparency in future research.Clinical trial number: Not applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42443603What 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.