Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25764442›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2015

Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in differential diagnosis of benign and malignant ovarian tumors.

Jing-Jing Qiao, Jing Yu, Zhe Yu, Na Li, Chen Song, Man Li

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Imaging of Canine Neoplastic Reproductive Disorders.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Ability ofContrast media & molecular imaging · 2019
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
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

6 authors.

Jing-Jing QiaoThe Second Department of Oncology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian 116027, P.R. China.
Jing YuThe Second Department of Oncology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian 116027, P.R. China.
Zhe YuThe Second Department of Oncology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian 116027, P.R. China.
Na LiThe Second Department of Oncology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian 116027, P.R. China.
Chen SongThe Second Department of Oncology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian 116027, P.R. China.
Man LiThe Second Department of Oncology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian 116027, P.R. China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) in differential diagnosis of benign and malignant ovarian tumors.

methodsThe scientific literature databases PubMed, Cochrane Library and CNKI were comprehensively searched for studies relevant to the use of CEUS technique for differential diagnosis of benign and malignant ovarian cancer. Pooled summary statistics for specificity (Spe), sensitivity (Sen), positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+/LR-), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and their 95%CIs were calculated. Software for statistical analysis included STATA version 12.0 (Stata Corp, College Station, TX, USA) and Meta-Disc version 1.4 (Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain).

resultsFollowing a stringent selection process, seven high quality clinical trials were found suitable for inclusion in the present meta-analysis. The 7 studies contained a combined total of 375 ovarian cancer patients (198 malignant and 177 benign). Statistical analysis revealed that CEUS was associated with the following performance measures in differential diagnosis of ovarian tumors: pooled Sen was 0.96 (95%CI = 0.92∼0.98); the summary Spe was 0.91 (95%CI = 0.86∼0.94); the pooled LR+ was 10.63 (95%CI = 6.59∼17.17); the pooled LR- was 0.04 (95%CI = 0.02∼0.09); and the pooled DOR was 241.04 (95% CI = 92.61∼627.37). The area under the SROC curve was 0.98 (95% CI = 0.20∼1.00). Lastly, publication bias was not detected (t = -0.52, P = 0.626) in the meta-analysis.

conclusionsOur results revealed the high clinical value of CEUS in differential diagnosis of benign and malignant ovarian tumors. Further, CEUS may also prove to be useful in differential diagnosis at early stages of this disease.

Indexed as

Contrast MediaDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansOvarian NeoplasmsUltrasonographyContrast Media

Identifiers

PMID25764442
PMCPMC4357383

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.