ReviewBrain & spine2025
Neurocognitive evaluation in patients with intracranial Meningiomas: A systematic review.
Review in Brain & spine, 2025. 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.
- A multidisciplinary program for meningioma treatment, research, and support services.Neuro-oncology practice · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Meningiomas remain the most frequently occurring intracranial, extra-axial, space-occupying lesions. Aspects such as neurocognitive function and quality of life become more and more crucial. Several meningioma patients present with evidence of neurocognitive impairment, behavioral disorders, or even psychiatric symptoms. Research question: This review synthesizes the current literature on neurocognitive evaluation in intracranial meningioma patients, focusing on the range of cognitive domains affected (Q1), the assessment tools utilized (Q2), and the relationship between tumor characteristics and cognitive outcomes (Q3). Materials and methods: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review was performed. We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Dimensions, to identify relevant studies published to date. Additionally, we examined the reference lists of the selected studies. The most recent literature search was conducted on January 31, 2025. Results: We included 30 studies. The neurocognitive domains examined encompass a range of functions, such as executive functioning, memory, attention, perceptual speed, visuospatial abilities, verbal fluency, cognitive flexibility, and cognitive function. The most frequently used tests as demonstrated in current literature are WAIS, RAVLT, WMS, TMT, Stroop test and CNS Vital signs. Tumor size, increased age, peritumoral edema and skull base meningiomas were all associated with worse performance in various cognitive domains. Discussion and conclusion: Our analysis reveals that meningiomas can significantly impact cognitive function, affecting various domains such as memory, executive function, attention, and language. Most of these domains seem to improve postoperatively. A common battery test for neurocognitive evaluation in all meningioma patients would provide us with more comparable and reliable results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.