ReviewNature reviews. Clinical oncology2012
Imaging in oncology--over a century of advances.
Review in Nature reviews. Clinical oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- The lung cancers: staging and response, CT,The British journal of radiology · 2023Review
- OptimizedPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Iron-Gold Nanoflowers: A Promising Tool for Multimodal Imaging and Hyperthermia Therapy.Pharmaceutics · 2022Article
- Radiomics in hepatocellular carcinoma: a quantitative review.Hepatology international · 2019Review
- Radiomics and radiogenomics of primary liver cancers.Clinical and molecular hepatology · 2019Review
- The kinetics ofEJNMMI research · 2018Article
- Parameters Influencing PET Imaging Features: A Phantom Study with Irregular and Heterogeneous Synthetic Lesions.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2018Article
- Evolution of lymphoma staging and response evaluation: current limitations and future directions.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2017Article
- Breast ultrasound scans - surgeons' expectations.Journal of ultrasonography · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the past 120 years, the discipline of oncology has evolved so that a multitude of anatomical and increasingly complex functional imaging techniques are now applicable in both clinical and research platforms. This Timeline article revisits the achievements of the pioneer techniques in cancer imaging, discusses how these techniques have changed over time, provides some examples of clinical importance, and ventures to explain how imaging will remodel the future of modern oncology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23149892What 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.