ArticleThe British journal of radiology2018
National survey of imaging practice for suspected or confirmed plasma cell malignancies.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Provider and patient perceptions on the usage of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in oncology: a scoping review.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026Review
- Imaging in plasma cell disorders-consensus recommendations of the Asian myeloma network bone imaging workgroup.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2025Review
- Present and future of whole-body MRI in metastatic disease and myeloma: how and why you will do it.Skeletal radiology · 2024Review
- National myeloma patient survey shows continuing inappropriate imaging and geographical inequalities.The British journal of radiology · 2024Article
- Floccinaucinihilipilification: is there a continuing role for the radiographic skeletal survey?Skeletal radiology · 2022Article
- 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
12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objective: Cross-sectional imaging is now recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) for patients with suspected and newly diagnosed myeloma instead of skeletal survey. The objectives of this study were: (1) To evaluate compliance of current UK imaging practice with reference to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence best-practice clinical guidelines for plasma cell malignancies. (2) To identify factors which may influence diagnostic imaging choices.
methods: We conducted a national online survey to assess compliance with guidelines and to identify challenges to implementation (endorsed by Myeloma UK, UK Myeloma Forum and the British Society of Skeletal Radiologists).
results: Responses were received from 31 district general and 28 teaching hospitals. For suspected and confirmed myeloma, skeletal survey remained the most frequent first-line imaging test (suspected myeloma 44.3%, confirmed myeloma 37.7%). Only 9.8 % of responders offered first-line whole body MRI.
conclusion: Significant challenges remain to standardisation of imaging practice in accordance with national best-practice guidelines. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE:: This is the first publication to date evaluating current UK imaging practice for assessing myeloma since the publication of new guidelines recommending use of advanced cross-sectional imaging techniques. Skeletal survey remains the most commonly performed first-line imaging test in patients with suspected or confirmed myeloma and this is largely due to resource limitations within radiology departments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.