The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Individual Patient Data Subgroup Meta-Analysis of Surgery for Spontaneous Supratentorial Intracerebral Hemorrhage
Open accessAbstract
Background and Purpose—: By 2010 there had been 14 published trials of surgery for intracerebral hemorrhage reported in systematic reviews or to the authors, but the role and timing of operative intervention remain controversial and the practice continues to be haphazard. This study attempted to obtain individual patient data from each of the 13 studies published since 1985 to better define groups of patients that might benefit from surgery. Methods—: Authors of identified published articles were approached by mail, e-mail, and at conferences and invited to take part in the study. Data were obtained from 8 studies (2186 cases). Individual patient data included patient's age, Glasgow Coma Score at presentation, volume and site of hematoma, presence of intraventricular hemorrhage, method of evacuation, time to randomization, and outcome. Results—: Meta-analysis indicated that there was improved outcome with surgery if randomization was undertaken within 8 hours of ictus ( P =0.003), or the volume of the hematoma was 20 to 50 mL ( P =0.004), or the Glasgow Coma Score was between 9 and 12 ( P =0.0009), or the patient was aged between 50 and 69 years ( P =0.01). In addition, there was some evidence that more superficial hematomas with no intraventricular hemorrhage might also benefit ( P =0.09). Conclusions—: There is evidence that surgery is of benefit if undertaken early before the patient deteriorates. This work identifies areas for further research. Ongoing studies in subgroups of patients such as the Surgical Trial in Lobar Intracerebral Hemorrhage (STICH II) will confirm whether these interpretations can be replicated.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.005 · Cited by 19,575
Moher, D., Cook, D. J., Eastwood, S., Olkin, I., Rennie, D., & Stroup, D. F. (1999) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(99)04149-5 · Cited by 4,826
Cited by
Greenberg, S. M., Ziai, W. C., Cordonnier, C., Dowlatshahi, D., Francis, B., Goldstein, J. N., Hemphill, J. C., Johnson, R., Keigher, K. M., Mack, W. J., et al. (2022) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/str.0000000000000407 · Cited by 1,639
Campbell, B. C. V., & Khatri, P. (2020) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(20)31179-x · Cited by 1,116
Intracerebral hemorrhage: an update on diagnosis and treatment
Hostettler, I. C., Seiffge, D. J., & Werring, D. J. (2019) · Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/14737175.2019.1623671 · Cited by 341
Vascular disruption and blood–brain barrier dysfunction in intracerebral hemorrhage
Keep, R. F., Zhou, N., Xiang, J., Andjelkovic, A. V., Hua, Y., & Xi, G. (2014) · Fluids and Barriers of the CNS · doi:10.1186/2045-8118-11-18 · Cited by 220
Reversal strategies for vitamin Kantagonists in acute intracerebral hemorrhage
Parry‐Jones, A. R., Di Napoli, M., Goldstein, J. N., Schreuder, F. H. B. M., Tetri, S., Tatlisumak, T., Yan, B., van Nieuwenhuizen, K. M., Dequatre‐Ponchelle, N., Lee‐Archer, M., et al. (2015) · Annals of Neurology · doi:10.1002/ana.24416 · Cited by 90
Metadata
- Authors
- Gregson, B. A., Broderick, J. P., Auer, L. M., Batjer, H., Chen, X.-C., Juvela, S., Morgenstern, L. B., Pantazis, G. C., Teernstra, O. P. M., Wang, W.-Z., Zuccarello, M., & Mendelow, A. D.
- Venue
- Stroke
- Published
- 2012-06
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1496-1504
- ISSN
- 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4628
- OpenAlex
- W2132518104
- Cited by
- 265
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 3.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.