Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24715656›Full record

GuidelineJournal of neuro-oncology2014

The role of imaging in the management of progressive glioblastoma : a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guideline.

Timothy Charles Ryken, Nafi Aygun, Johnathan Morris, Marin Schweizer, Rajeshwari Nair, Cassandra Spracklen, Steven N Kalkanis, Jeffrey J Olson, AANS/CNS Joint Guidelines Committee

Abstract readPractice GuidelineSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Guideline in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
14.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 197 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. SEOM clinical guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of glioblastoma (2017).Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2018
    Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Analyzing magnetic resonance imaging data from glioma patients using deep learning.Computerized medical imaging and graphics : the official journal of the Computerized Medical Imaging Society · 2021
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. A Review of Magnetic Particle Imaging and Perspectives on Neuroimaging.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2019
    Review
  18. The British journal of radiology · 2019
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Timothy Charles RykenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Iowa Spine and Brain Institute, Waterloo, IA, USA, timothy-ryken@uiowa.edu.
Nafi Aygun
Johnathan Morris
Marin Schweizer
Rajeshwari Nair
Cassandra Spracklen
Steven N Kalkanis
Jeffrey J Olson
AANS/CNS Joint Guidelines Committee
University of Iowa · USEmory University · USHenry Ford Health System · USJohns Hopkins University · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

questionWhich imaging techniques most accurately differentiate true tumor progression from pseudo-progression or treatment related changes in patients with previously diagnosed glioblastoma? TARGET POPULATION: These recommendations apply to adults with previously diagnosed glioblastoma who are suspected of experiencing progression of the neoplastic process. RECOMMENDATIONS LEVEL II: Magnetic resonance imaging with and without gadolinium enhancement is recommended as the imaging surveillance method to detect the progression of previously diagnosed glioblastoma. LEVEL II: Magnetic resonance spectroscopy is recommended as a diagnostic method to differentiate true tumor progression from treatment-related imaging changes or pseudo-progression in patients with suspected progressive glioblastoma. LEVEL III: The routine use of positron emission tomography to identify progression of glioblastoma is not recommended. LEVEL III: Single-photon emission computed tomography imaging is recommended as a diagnostic method to differentiate true tumor progression from treatment-related imaging changes or pseudo-progression in patients with suspected progressive glioblastoma.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingMagnetic Resonance SpectroscopyPositron-Emission TomographyTomography, Emission-Computed, Single-PhotonAdultBrain NeoplasmsDiagnosis, DifferentialDisease ProgressionEvidence-Based MedicineGadoliniumGlioblastomaHumansGadolinium

Identifiers

PMID24715656
OpenAlexW2188538530

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.