ArticleOncology letters2016
Diffusion weighted imaging for the differential diagnosis of benign vs. malignant ovarian neoplasms.
Article in Oncology letters, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Emerging Radiopharmaceuticals Beyond FDG for Ovarian Cancer: A Review of Advances in Nuclear Medicine.Cancer medicine · 2025Review
- Combined radiomics-clinical model to predict platinum-sensitivity in advanced high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma using multimodal MRI.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE Consensus Statement on pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2021Review
- A multidisciplinary approach remains the best strategy to improve and strengthen the management of ovarian cancer (Review).International journal of oncology · 2021Review
- ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE Consensus Statement on preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumours.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2021Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging findings for discriminating clear cell carcinoma and endometrioid carcinoma of the ovary.Journal of ovarian research · 2019Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging of pediatric adnexal masses and mimics.Pediatric radiology · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In order to assess the diagnostic accuracy of diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) in differentiating between benign and malignant ovarian neoplasms, a systemic meta-analysis was conducted. Relevant studies were retrieved from scientific literature databases, including the PubMed, Wiley, EBSCO, Ovid, Web of Science, Wanfang, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and VIP databases. Following a multi-step screening and study selection process, the relevant data was extracted for use in the present study. Statistical analyses were performed using Meta-disc software version 1.4 and STATA statistical software version 12.0. A total of 285 articles were retrieved from the database searches. Following a careful screening process, 10 case-control studies were selected for the present meta-analysis. The 10 studies investigated the efficacy of DWI in diagnosing ovarian neoplasms, and included a combined total of 1,159 subjects, of which 559 patients had malignant lesions and 600 had benign lesions. The results showed that the pooled sensitivity, pooled specificity, pooled positive likelihood ratio, pooled negative likelihood ratio, pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and area under the curve of the summary receiver operating characteristics curve of DWI for differentiating between benign and malignant ovarian neoplasms were 0.93, 0.89, 7.58, 0.10, 85.33 and 0.95, respectively. A subgroup analysis based on ethnicity revealed no significant difference between Asians and Caucasians. Another subgroup analysis by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) type showed that the DORs for GE Healthcare Life Sciences and Siemens AG machines were 100.76 [95% confidence interval (CI), 65.28-155.53] and 30.85 (95% CI, 10.40-91.53), respectively; this indicates that the diagnostic efficiency of the GE Healthcare Life Sciences MRI is superior compared with the Siemens AG MRI. The DWI demonstrated an excellent diagnostic performance in discriminating between benign and malignant ovarian neoplasms, and predicted the surgical outcome in ovarian neoplasms.
Indexed as
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.