Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28375660›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of radiology2017

Comparison of post-contrast 3D-T

Balaji Jeevanandham, Tejas Kalyanpur, Prashant Gupta, Mathew Cherian

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of radiology, 2017. 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
–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.

  1. Review
  2. Improving small brain metastasis detection with composite and augmented TQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Evaluation of CE-MATRIX-Enhanced FLAIR imaging in the detection of leptomeningeal metastasis.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

4 authors.

Balaji JeevanandhamDepartment of Radiology, Kovai Medical Centre and Hospital, Coimbatore, India.
Tejas KalyanpurDepartment of Radiology, Kovai Medical Centre and Hospital, Coimbatore, India.
Prashant GuptaDepartment of Radiology, Kovai Medical Centre and Hospital, Coimbatore, India.
Mathew CherianDepartment of Radiology, Kovai Medical Centre and Hospital, Coimbatore, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study was to assess the usefulness of newer three-dimensional (3D)-T

methods78 patients who presented with high suspicion of meningeal abnormalities were evaluated using post-contrast 3D-T

resultsPost-contrast 3D-T

conclusionThe 3D-T

Indexed as

Imaging, Three-DimensionalAdolescentAdultChildContrast MediaFemaleHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedIndiaMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMeningesMiddle AgedProspective StudiesContrast Media

Identifiers

PMID28375660
PMCPMC5602177

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.