Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28702407›Full record

ArticleSouth Asian journal of cancer

Haoping Xu, Rui Guo, Weihui Xu, Yanying Pan, Tao Ma

Open access · diamondAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in South Asian journal of cancer. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 41% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Haoping XuDepartment of Radiochemotherapy, Shanghai Institute of Digestive Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, China.
Rui GuoDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Shanghai Institute of Digestive Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, China.
Weihui XuDepartment of Radiochemotherapy, Shanghai Institute of Digestive Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, China.
Yanying PanDepartment of Radiochemotherapy, Shanghai Institute of Digestive Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, China.
Tao MaDepartment of Surgery, Shanghai Institute of Digestive Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, China.
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsRetrospectively analyze the sensitivity of MATERIALS AND

methodsA total of 53 patients with gastric malignancy proven by surgery and pathology were enrolled in the study. All the patients underwent gastric endoscopy and PET-CT scan before surgery. And the PET-CT images were interpreted by the observers who were blinded to the results of the gastric endoscopy. The sensitivity of gastric endoscopy,

resultsOf 53 gastric malignancy patients, five cases were proven to be false-negative detected by gastric endoscopy, and the sensitivity of which was 90.57%. The sensitivity of PET scan alone was 86.79%, which was observed no significant difference to that of gastric endoscopy diagnosis,

conclusions

Indexed as

18F-fluorodeoxyglucosegastric endoscopygastric malignancy positron emission tomography-computed tomography

Identifiers

PMID28702407
PMCPMC5506810
OpenAlexW2745296528

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.