Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21837493›Full record

ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2011

[What is new in 2011 regarding testicular cancer].

S Krege

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 96% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

S KregeKlinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Alexianer Krankenhaus Maria-Hilf GmbH Krefeld, Dießemer Bruch 81, Krefeld, Germany. susanne.krege@alexianer-krefeld.de
Maria Hilf Krankenhaus · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The management of testicular cancer has already been standardized to the greatest extent by consistent performance of clinical trials. While the current aim is to reduce the therapy for early stage disease without jeopardizing the high cure rates, for patients in advanced stages the goal is to achieve further improvement of survival rates. This overview presents new aspects of organ-preserving primary tumor resection, prognostic factors in seminoma, secondary malignancies, high-dose therapy, residual tumor resection, aftercare, and PET/CT.

Indexed as

Carcinoma in SituChemoradiotherapyClinical Trials as TopicCombined Modality TherapyHormone Replacement TherapyHumansHypothermia, InducedMaleNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm, ResidualNeoplasms, Germ Cell and EmbryonalNeoplasms, Radiation-InducedNeoplasms, Second PrimaryNeoplasm StagingOrchiectomyPositron-Emission TomographyTestosterone

Identifiers

PMID21837493
OpenAlexW1532486019

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.