Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33178801›Full record

ReviewAnnals of translational medicine2020

The less invasive paradox, why carotid artery stenting is not suitable for the high-risk patient.

Matthew Machin, Safa Salim, Sarah Onida, Alun Huw Davies

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of translational medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 40% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Matthew MachinAcademic Department of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Safa SalimAcademic Department of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Sarah OnidaAcademic Department of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Alun Huw DaviesAcademic Department of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust · GBImperial College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Carotid artery stenosis causes significant morbidity and mortality accounting for approximately 8% of all ischaemic strokes. Carotid artery stenting (CAS) offers an endovascular alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA), suggested as a viable option in those deemed high-risk for open CEA due to comorbidities or operative technical considerations. A number of large randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analysis comparing CAS

Indexed as

Carotid artery stenting (CAS)carotid endarterectomy (CEA)stroke

Identifiers

PMID33178801
PMCPMC7607106
OpenAlexW3027888139

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.