ReviewAnatomical science international2026
Global prevalence of high jugular bulb and jugular bulb dehiscence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Anatomical science international, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High jugular bulb (HJB) and jugular bulb dehiscence (JBD) are anatomical variants with significant clinical implications; however, reported prevalence varies widely due to heterogeneous definitions and imaging protocols. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 49 studies, encompassing more than 43,000 temporal bones and 17,000 patients, to estimate pooled HJB and JBD prevalence. Observational studies reporting extractable prevalence data were synthesized using random-effects generalized linear mixed models with cluster-robust variance estimation. HJB definitions were harmonized into landmark-based families (internal acoustic meatus, round window/basal turn, tympanic annulus, tympanic protrusion), and separate analyses were performed for per-patient and per-ear denominators. Pooled HJB prevalence was 24.4% per patient (95% CI 16.7-34.3; prediction interval 3.8-72.4) and 16.2% per ear (10.7-23.8; PI 1.6-69.7), with extreme between-study heterogeneity (I
Indexed as
Identifiers
41627773What 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.