Use of patient-reported data in determining factors contributing to internal jugular vein stenosis outcomes.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Long-term safety and efficacy of stenting on correcting internal jugular vein and cerebral venous sinus stenosis.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2023
   Article
2. Safety and efficacy comparison between OACs plus single antiplatelet and dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with cerebral venous sinus stenosis poststenting.BMC neurology · 2022
   Observational

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Probable factors affecting clinical outcomes of internal jugular vein stenosis.2019

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.