Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22370860›Full record

ReviewJournal of feline medicine and surgery2012

Feline alimentary lymphoma: 1. Classification, risk factors, clinical signs and non-invasive diagnostics.

Vanessa R Barrs, Julia A Beatty

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of feline medicine and surgery, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 83 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The oncogenome of the domestic cat.Science (New York, N.Y.) · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. A RecurrentCancers · 2021
    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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Vanessa R BarrsValentine Charlton Cat Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney NSW 2006, Australia. vanessa.barrs@sydney.edu.au
Julia A Beatty
University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

practical relevanceAlimentary lymphoma (AL) occurs commonly in cats and exists as distinct subtypes that differ in their clinical course, response to treatment and prognosis. Accurate diagnosis is important to guide appropriate treatment. CLINICAL CHALLENGES: Differentiation of low-grade alimentary lymphoma from lymphoplasmacytic enteritis can be challenging, especially where endoscopic intestinal biopsies, which sample only the mucosa and submucosa, are used. The major differentials for intermediate- and high-grade alimentary lymphoma are other neoplastic and non-neoplastic intestinal mass lesions. The diagnosis of large granular lymphocyte lymphoma requires vigilance as it may be missed with routine diagnostics. PATIENT GROUP: AL affects predominantly middle- to old-aged domestic crossbred cats (median age 10-13 years). EVIDENCE BASE: The evidence supporting this review is grade II, III and IV, derived from prospective studies, retrospective case series, reviews, extrapolation from other species, pathophysiological justification and the combined clinical experience of those working in the field.

Indexed as

Cat DiseasesAnimalsCatsDiagnosis, DifferentialGastrointestinal NeoplasmsLymphomaRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID22370860
PMCPMC10822432
OpenAlexW2124717062

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.