ArticleCase reports in gastroenterology2009
Unusual Masses of the Pancreas to Be Aware of.
Article in Case reports in gastroenterology, 2009. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Errors and mistakes in the ultrasound diagnosis of the pancreas.Journal of ultrasonography · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper aims at emphasizing the difficulty in assessing preoperatively the diagnosis of solid masses of the pancreas whatever the initial clinical presentation may be. We illustrate our purpose describing consecutive cases of pancreatic masses of the pancreas we recently had and who were followed according to the internal guidelines of investigation of our referral hospital. Whereas malignant tumors of the pancreas represent the vast majority of solid tumors of the pancreas, other diagnoses must be evoked. We report three cases of pancreatic solid masses that were explored by endoscopic ultrasonography coupled with fine needle aspiration, a method universally considered to be both reliable and accurate but which failed to assess definitive diagnosis due to both cytological pitfalls and sampling error.
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.