Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20708548›Full record

ReviewNeuroimaging clinics of North America2010

Imaging of brain tumors: MR spectroscopy and metabolic imaging.

Alena Horská, Peter B Barker

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neuroimaging clinics of North America, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 163 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
163citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

163 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy in oncology: the fingerprints of cancer?Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey)
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Clinical MR Biomarkers.Recent results in cancer research. Fortschritte der Krebsforschung. Progres dans les recherches sur le cancer · 2026
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. A data-driven algorithm to determineMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2026
    Article
  20. Article

103 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Alena HorskáRussell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 600 North Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA.
Peter B Barker

Funding

X-LINKED ADRENOLEUKODYSTROPHYP41RR015241 · NCRR · HUGO W. MOSER RES INST KENNEDY KRIEGER · PI MC DONALD, JOHN · 2001 to 2011
$18.5M
NCRR NIH HHS P41 RR015241
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The utility of magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) in diagnosis and evaluation of treatment response to human brain tumors has been widely documented. The role of MRS in tumor classification, tumors versus nonneoplastic lesions, prediction of survival, treatment planning, monitoring of therapy, and post-therapy evaluation is discussed. This article delineates the need for standardization and further study in order for MRS to become widely used as a routine clinical tool.

Indexed as

BrainBrain DiseasesBrain NeoplasmsDiffusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMagnetic Resonance SpectroscopyNeoplasm InvasivenessSurvival Analysis

Identifiers

PMID20708548
PMCPMC2927327

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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 OpenQuestion graph.