Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29267430›Full record

ArticleEinstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil)

A review of data in medical request and the patient questionnaire for magnetic resonance evaluation of silicone breast implants.

Jaime Anger, Pablo Eduardo Elias, Paula de Camargo Moraes, Nelson Hamerschlak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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.

Jaime AngerHospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Pablo Eduardo EliasFaculdade de Medicina do ABC, Santo André, SP, Brazil.
Paula de Camargo MoraesHospital das Clinicas, Universidade de São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Nelson HamerschlakHospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo analyze the quality and quantity of data in the questionnaires and in request forms for magnetic resonance imaging.

methodsThis retrospective study was conducted with data from 300 medical records. The research used the following data from the questionnaires: patient age, reason for the magnetic resonance imaging, reason for placing the breast implant, report of any signs or symptoms, time elapsed since surgery to place the current breast implant, replacement implant surgery, chemotherapy, and/or radiation therapy treatments. From the magnetic resonance imaging request forms, information about the breast implant, the implant placement surgery, patient clinical information and ordering physician specialty were verified.

resultsThe mean age of patients was 48.8 years, and the mean time elapsed since breast implant surgery was 5 years. A total of 60% of women in the sample were submitted to aesthetic surgery, while 23.7% were submitted to chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy. In the request forms, 23.7% of physicians added some piece of information about the patient, whereas 2.3% of them informed the type of implant and 5.2% informed about the surgery.

conclusionThe amount of information in the magnetic resonance imaging request forms is very limited, and this may hinder quality of radiological reports. Institutional and technological measures should be implemented to encourage the requesting physicians and radiologists to share information.

Indexed as

Breast ImplantsSiliconesSurveys and QuestionnairesAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMedical Order Entry SystemsMedical RecordsMiddle AgedReferral and ConsultationRetrospective StudiesTime FactorsSilicones

Identifiers

PMID29267430
PMCPMC5875161

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.