Clinical significance of

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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Clinico-Pathological Features and Immunohistochemical Comparison of p16, p53, and Ki-67 Expression in Muscle-Invasive and Non-Muscle-Invasive Conventional Urothelial Bladder Carcinoma.Clinics and practice · 2023
   Article
2. Novel Diagnostic Value of Driver Gene Transcription Signatures to Characterise Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma, ccRCC.Pathology oncology research : POR · 2022
   Article
3. Mechanisms of TP53 Pathway Inactivation in Embryonic and Somatic Cells-Relevance for Understanding (Germ Cell) Tumorigenesis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
   Review
4. Loss of Both USP10 and p14ARF Protein Expression Is an Independent Prognostic Biomarker for Poor Prognosis in Patients With Epithelial Ovarian Cancer.Cancer genomics & proteomics
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

Indexed as