ReviewAnnales de pathologie2010
[What is new in 2010 for electron microscopy in surgical pathology?].
Review in Annales de pathologie, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pathology of infectious diseases: what does the future hold?Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2017Review
- [What place and what future for the pathology of infectious and tropical diseases in France?].Annales de pathologie · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the last decades, several ancillary methods, such as immunohistochemistry and molecular biology techniques, have increased the possibilities for the diagnosis and to evaluate the prognosis of lesions observed in a laboratory of pathology. Conversely, the impact of another method largely used a couple of years ago in a laboratory of pathology, the electron microscopy (EM), is currently limited. EM is a difficult, quite expensive and long method, which requires technicians with a high qualification. Therefore, EM is currently rarely available at the hospital in a laboratory of pathology and is essentially established in research centers. However, EM is still an essential tool for the surgical pathologist. This method allows in some circumstances to confirm or, more rarely, to make the diagnosis of a couple of tissular and cellular lesions observed in human pathology. EM is also an interesting method to better understand the etiopathogenesis of emerging human diseases, in particular of emerging infectious diseases. In this review, we report the main indication of EM in human pathology, we lay special emphasize in certain infectious diseases and neoplasia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.