ReviewPediatric radiology2015
Why measure tumours?
Review in Pediatric radiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Imaging and characterization of pulmonary nodules in children with solid tumors: what makes a pulmonary nodule a metastasis?Pediatric radiology · 2026Review
- White paper on the current state of imaging biomarkers in paediatric oncology.Pediatric radiology · 2025Review
- Physician-guided deep learning model for assessing thymic epithelial tumor volume.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2025Article
- Direct correlation of MR-DWI and histopathology of Wilms' tumours through a patient-specific 3D-printed cutting guide.European radiology · 2025Article
- Article
- The clinical impact of observer variability in lung nodule classification in children with Wilms tumour.Pediatric blood & cancer · 2022Article
- Diagnostic accuracy and added value of qualitative radiological review ofNeuro-oncology practice · 2019Article
- Volumetric assessment of tumor size changes in pediatric low-grade gliomas: feasibility and comparison with linear measurements.Neuroradiology · 2018Article
- Frequency and characteristics of pulmonary nodules in children at computed tomography.Pediatric radiology · 2017Article
- Radiological response and histological findings in nephroblastoma: Is the any correlation?African journal of paediatric surgery : AJPSArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article questions the scientific justification of ingrained radiologic practices exemplified by size measurements of childhood solid tumours. This is approached by a critical review of staging systems from a selection of paediatric oncological treatment protocols. Local staging remains size-dependent for some tumour types. The consequent stage assignment can significantly influence treatment intensity. Still, the protocols tend not to give precise guidance on how to perform scans and standardise measurements. Also, they do not estimate or account for the inevitable variability in measurements. Counts and measurements of lung nodules are, within some tumour groups, used for diagnosis of metastatic disease. There is, however, no evidence that nodule size is a useful discriminator of benign and malignant lung nodules. The efficacy of imaging depends chiefly on observations being precise, accurate and valid for the desired diagnostic purpose. Because measurements without estimates of their errors are meaningless, studies of variability dependent on tumour shape and location, imaging device and observer need to be encouraged. Reproducible observations make good candidates for staging parameters if they have prognostic validity and at the same time show little covariation with (thereby adding new information to) the existing staging system. The lack of scientific rigour has made the validity of size measurement very difficult to assess. Action is needed, the most important being radiologists' active contribution in development of oncological staging systems, attention to standardisation, knowledge about errors in measurement and protection against undue influence of such errors in the staging of the individual child.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.