ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2018
Correction to: PET imaging of EGFR expression using an
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- PET imaging in patients with brain metastasis-report of the RANO/PET group.Neuro-oncology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum for
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The original version of this article contained a mistake in the first paragraph of "Cell uptake and internalization of
Identifiers
30167802What 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.