Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26958316›Full record

ArticleCartilage2016

High-Resolution Methods for Diagnosing Cartilage Damage In Vivo.

Kira D Novakofski, Sarah L Pownder, Matthew F Koff, Rebecca M Williams, Hollis G Potter, Lisa A Fortier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cartilage, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. T2 mapping magnetic resonance imaging of cartilage in hemophilia.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kira D NovakofskiDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Sarah L PownderMRI Laboratory, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.
Matthew F KoffMRI Laboratory, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.
Rebecca M WilliamsDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Hollis G PotterMRI Laboratory, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.
Lisa A FortierDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Cornell University · USHospital for Special Surgery · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Advances in current clinical modalities, including magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography, allow for earlier diagnoses of cartilage damage that could mitigate progression to osteoarthritis. However, current imaging modalities do not detect submicrometer damage. Developments in in vivo or arthroscopic techniques, including optical coherence tomography, ultrasonography, bioelectricity including streaming potential measurement, noninvasive electroarthrography, and multiphoton microscopy can detect damage at an earlier time point, but they are limited by a lack of penetration and the ability to assess an entire joint. This article reviews current advancements in clinical and developing modalities that can aid in the early diagnosis of cartilage injury and facilitate studies of interventional therapeutics.

Indexed as

cartilageCTimagingMRImultiphoton microscopy

Identifiers

PMID26958316
PMCPMC4749750
OpenAlexW2336260219

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.