Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28421396›Full record

ReviewJapanese journal of radiology2017

Reiko Nakajima, Ken Kimura, Koichiro Abe, Shuji Sakai

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Japanese journal of radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Contribution of [Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Application of Metabolic Reprogramming to Cancer Imaging and Diagnosis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. PET/CT and PET/MRI in ophthalmic oncology (Review).International journal of oncology · 2020
    Review
  14. PET/CT in pediatric oncology.American journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2020
    Review
  15. Usefulness of [Neurologia medico-chirurgica · 2019
    Article
  16. Diagnostic accuracy ofBMC cancer · 2019
    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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Reiko NakajimaDepartments of Diagnostic Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Tokyo Women's Medical University, 8-1 Kawada-cho, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 162-8666, Japan. nakajima.reiko@twmu.ac.jp.
Ken KimuraDepartments of Diagnostic Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Tokyo Women's Medical University, 8-1 Kawada-cho, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 162-8666, Japan.
Koichiro AbeDepartments of Diagnostic Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Tokyo Women's Medical University, 8-1 Kawada-cho, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 162-8666, Japan.
Shuji SakaiDepartments of Diagnostic Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Tokyo Women's Medical University, 8-1 Kawada-cho, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 162-8666, Japan.
Tokyo Women's Medical University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Positron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyBrain DiseasesCarbon RadioisotopesDiagnosis, DifferentialHumansMethionineCarbon RadioisotopesMethionine11C-methionine (MET)Benign brain diseasePositron emission tomography (PET)

Identifiers

PMID28421396
OpenAlexW2605438845

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.