Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24332638›Full record

ReviewUrologic oncology2014

Defining the level of evidence for technology adoption in the localized prostate cancer pathway.

Massimo Valerio, Ahmed El-Shater Bosaily, Mark Emberton, Hashim U Ahmed

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Urologic oncology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Multiparametric MRI in the PSA screening era.BioMed research international · 2014
    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

4 authors.

Massimo ValerioDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK; Department of Urology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; Department of Urology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland. Electronic address: massimo.valerio.12@ucl.ac.uk.
Ahmed El-Shater BosailyDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK; Department of Urology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Mark EmbertonDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK; Department of Urology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Hashim U AhmedDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK; Department of Urology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.

Funding

Department of HealthMedical Research Council G0701302Medical Research Council G1002509Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

New technologies in prostate cancer are attempting to change the current prostate cancer pathway by aiming to reduce harms while maintaining the benefits associated with screening, diagnosis, and treatment. In this article, we discuss the optimal evaluation that new technologies should undergo to provide level 1 evidence typically required to change the practice. With this in mind, we focus on feasible and pragmatic trials that could be delivered in a timely fashion by many centers while retaining primary outcomes that focus on clinically meaningful outcomes.

Indexed as

Androgen AntagonistsHumansImage-Guided BiopsyMaleProstateProstatectomyProstatic NeoplasmsRadiotherapyReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityAndrogen AntagonistsFocal therapyHealth technology assessmentMRIProstate cancerTargeted biopsyTrials

Identifiers

PMID24332638
PMCPMC4136740

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.