Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30116970›Full record

ReviewLa Radiologia medica2018

Simona Malaspina, Ugo De Giorgi, Jukka Kemppainen, Angelo Del Sole, Giovanni Paganelli

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in La Radiologia medica, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The Role of [Biomedicines · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Simona MalaspinaResidency Programme in Nuclear Medicine, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Ugo De GiorgiMedical Oncology Unit, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) IRCCS, Meldola, Italy.
Jukka KemppainenTurku PET Centre, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland.
Angelo Del SoleDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. angelo.delsole@unimi.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5364-9602
Giovanni PaganelliNuclear Medicine Unit, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) IRCCS, Meldola, Italy.
Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori · ITUniversity of Milan · ITTurku University Hospital · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Positron emission tomography (PET) has been commonly and successfully used, in combination with computed tomography (CT) and more recently magnetic resonance (MRI), in the workup of intermediate or high-risk prostate cancer (PCa). Nowadays, new specific receptor targeted PET tracers in prostate cancer imaging have been introduced; one of the most used is

Indexed as

Multimodal ImagingCholineGallium RadioisotopesHumansImage-Guided BiopsyMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPositron-Emission TomographyProstate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsRadiopharmaceuticalsSalvage TherapyCholineGallium RadioisotopesProstate-Specific AntigenRadiopharmaceuticalsMagnetic resonance imagingPositron emission tomographyProstate-specific membrane antigenProstte cancer

Identifiers

PMID30116970
OpenAlexW2886394563

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.