Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26830954›Full record

ReviewRadiation oncology (London, England)2016

A practical review of magnetic resonance imaging for the evaluation and management of cervical cancer.

Emma C Fields, Elisabeth Weiss

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. AAPM medical physics practice guideline 13.a: HDR brachytherapy, part A.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023
    Guideline
  2. EANM/SNMMI practice guideline for [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2021
    Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Magnetic Resonance Imaging Sequences and Technologies in Adaptive Radiation Therapy.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. The role of para-aortic nodal irradiation in cervical cancer.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology
    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

2 authors.

Emma C FieldsVirginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA. emma.fields@vcuhealth.org.
Elisabeth WeissVirginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cervical cancer is a leading cause of mortality in women worldwide. Staging and management of cervical cancer has for many years been based on clinical exam and basic imaging such as intravenous pyelogram and x-ray. Unfortunately, despite advances in radiotherapy and the inclusion of chemotherapy in the standard plan for locally advanced disease, local control has been unsatisfactory. This situation has changed only recently with the increasing implementation of magnetic resonance image (MRI)-guided brachytherapy. The purpose of this article is therefore to provide an overview of the benefits of MRI in the evaluation and management of cervical cancer for both external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy and to provide a practical approach if access to MRI is limited.

Indexed as

BrachytherapyFemaleHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeoplasm StagingRadiotherapyRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy, Image-GuidedRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedTomography, X-Ray ComputedUterine Cervical Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID26830954
PMCPMC4736634

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.