Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22349948›Full record

ArticleDer Radiologe2012

[Expectations of rheumatologists on imaging results].

C Dejaco, C Duftner, M Schirmer

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Radiologe, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

C DejacoKlinik für Innere Medizin, Univ.-Klinikum Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, A-6020, Innsbruck, Österreich.
C Duftner
M Schirmer
University Hospital Innsbruck · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

clinical/methodical issueClinical examination and laboratory results are often insufficient to support therapeutic decisions. STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL

methodsDiagnosis and organ-related imaging may provide important additional information for initial diagnosis (differential diagnoses), follow-up and prognosis. Especially functional imaging techniques, such as ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging are becoming more and more important for early diagnosis. METHODICAL INNOVATIONS: Imaging is already recognized in the classification criteria of several rheumatic diseases and new criteria for spondyloarthritis and polymyalgia rheumatica aim more and more at early diagnosis using functional imaging techniques, such as ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging. PERFORMANCE: Specific imaging findings are helpful for eliminating differential diagnoses. During follow-up disease control the status as well as progression of structural damage can be documented. In selected diseases imaging allows prognostic statements on both disease progression and therapeutic response to specific medication. ACHIEVEMENTS: The evidential value of imaging results varies with the rheumatological expectations. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: Overall rheumatological expectations on imaging differ widely and therefore support a differentiated use of imaging techniques.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelDiagnosis, DifferentialGermanyHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingRheumatic DiseasesRheumatologyUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID22349948
OpenAlexW44736328

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.