ArticleThe British journal of radiology2016
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multicenter development and validation of a probability-based model to diagnose Lewy body disease using ¹²³I-meta-iodobenzylguanidine.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- SympatheticAnnals of nuclear medicine · 2024Article
- CardiacJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021Article
- [Molecular imaging and biology · 2020Article
- 123I-ioflupane brain SPECT and 123I-MIBG cardiac planar scintigraphy combined use in uncertain parkinsonian disorders.Medicine · 2017Observational
- Standardization ofClinical and translational imaging · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objective: We performed
methods: Our study included 453 patients with clinically suspected LBD who had undergone
results: The early H/M ratio exhibited the best diagnostic ability. Its overall sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV and NPV were 72.2%, 93.1%, 84.3%, 88.5% and 82.2%, respectively (cut-off value 2.2 or less). However, there was no significant difference from the delayed H/M ratio or the results of visual assessment.
conclusion: ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE::
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.