Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22613930›Full record

ArticleClinical sarcoma research2011

Guidelines for histopathological specimen examination and diagnostic reporting of primary bone tumours.

D Charles Mangham, Nicholas A Athanasou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical sarcoma research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Neck of femur fracture: Previous history of malignancy is not an indication to send femoral head for routine histology.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
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.

D Charles Mangham
Nicholas A Athanasou

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review is intended to provide histopathologists with guidelines for clinical assessment, specimen handling and diagnostic reporting of benign and malignant primary bone tumours. Information from radiology, surgical, oncology and other clinical colleagues involved in the diagnosis and treatment of primary bone tumours should be properly assessed before undertaking a structured approach to specimen handling and histological reporting. This ensures that the information needed for planning appropriate treatment of these complex tumours is provided. Consistency in diagnostic evaluation with respect to both terminology and report content facilitates liaison at multidisciplinary bone tumour meetings and collaboration between cancer units and networks, as well as providing a common database for audit of the clinical, radiological and pathological aspects of bone tumours.

Identifiers

PMID22613930
PMCPMC3351796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.