Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24231826›Full record

ArticleDer Radiologe2013

[Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: from imaging to diagnosis].

M Gutberlet

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Radiologe, 2013. 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 68% 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.

M GutberletAbteilung für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Herzzentrum Leipzig - Universität Leipzig, Strümpellstr. 39, 04289, Leipzig, Deutschland, matthias.gutberlet@herzzentrum-leipzig.de.
Deutsches Herzzentrum der Charité · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) has evolved over the past 20 years from a research-based imaging modality to an indispensable routine procedure in cardiac diagnostics. In addition to the morphological representation of cardiac anatomy, whereby only noninvasive multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) is superior, another strength of CMR is the assessment of cardiac function and tissue differentiation. This requires that the radiologist performing the examination and analyzing the results has good knowledge of cardiac and thoracic anatomy and a detailed knowledge of the various cardiovascular diseases, hemodynamics, and pathophysiology. CMR reliably allows determination of a range of easy to determine quantitative parameters such as ventricular ejection fraction and also the valvular regurgitation fraction, which allows objective assessment of cardiac function. Especially the possibility to differentiate inflamed, viable, and ischemic tissue using adenosine stress MRI in the last 10 years has led to routine use of CMR. Even compared to competing nuclear medicine procedures, CMR is important for treatment decision-making and for prognosis estimation, thus, making it an indispensable component of cardiovascular diagnostics.

Indexed as

Heart DiseasesHumansImage EnhancementMagnetic Resonance AngiographyMagnetic Resonance Imaging, CineMyocardium

Identifiers

PMID24231826
OpenAlexW2409754091

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.