Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27229497›Full record

ReviewPediatric radiology2016

Magnetic resonance urography in the pediatric population: a clinical perspective.

Michael E Chua, Jessica M Ming, Walid A Farhat

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Pediatric radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Magnetic Resonance Urogram in Pediatric Urology: a Comprehensive Review of Applications and Advances.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
    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

3 authors.

Michael E ChuaDivision of Urology, Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Ave., Toronto, ON, M5G 1X8, Canada.
Jessica M MingDivision of Urology, Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Ave., Toronto, ON, M5G 1X8, Canada.
Walid A FarhatDivision of Urology, Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Ave., Toronto, ON, M5G 1X8, Canada. walid.farhat@sickkids.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diagnostic imaging in pediatric urology has traditionally relied upon multiple modalities based on availability, use of ionizing radiation, and invasiveness to evaluate urological anomalies. These modalities include ultrasonography, voiding cystourethrography, fluoroscopy and radionuclide scintigraphy. Magnetic resonance urography (MRU) has become increasingly useful in depicting more detailed abdominal and pelvic anatomy, specifically in duplex collecting systems, ectopic ureter, ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction, megaureter and congenital pelvic anomalies. Here we discuss the clinical role of MRU in the pediatric population and its future direction.

Indexed as

ChildHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingUrinary TractUrographyUrologic DiseasesAnomalyChildrenGenitourinaryMagnetic resonance urographyUrinary tractUrology

Identifiers

PMID27229497

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.