ArticleEndocrine2019
Are volume measurements of non-functioning pituitary adenomas reliable?
Article in Endocrine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Natural history of conservatively managed nonfunctioning pituitary macroadenomas in the elderly: A study from the Swedish Pituitary Registry.Pituitary · 2026Article
- Continuous white-light/indocyanine green overlay endoscopy in pituitary adenoma surgery: A prospective feasibility and safety study.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Corticotroph Tumour Type Influences Clinical Behaviour in Patients With Nonfunctioning Pituitary Neuroendocrine Tumours.Endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism · 2026Article
- Methylation and gene expression patterns in adamantinomatous craniopharyngioma highlight a panel of genes associated with disease progression-free survival.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Volumetric Resection and Complications in Nonfunctioning Pituitary Adenoma by Fully Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Approach along 15 Years of Single-Center Experience.Journal of neurological surgery. Part B, Skull base · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePrecise radiological assessment of tumour volume is important in the follow-up of non-functioning pituitary adenomas (NFPAs). We compared the reliability of two methods for tumour volume measurements in the pre- and postoperative setting.
methodsWe assessed the volume of 22 NFPAs at magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans before surgery and the first and third postoperative MRI obtained after submission from hospital. Volumetric assessments were performed both by summation of slices (SOS) and by diameter measures. All volumes were calculated independently by two readers.
resultsThe preoperative intra- and inter-rater reliability was good for both the SOS and the diameter method (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.996 and 0.990, and ICC: 0.982 and 0.967, respectively). The first postoperative investigation showed poorer intra- and inter-rater reliability for both methods (ICC: 0.872 and 0.791 and ICC: 0.792 and 0.810, respectively). The third postoperative MRI showed good intra-rater reliability (ICC: 0.961 and 0.962, respectively), but poorer inter-rater reliability for both methods (ICC: 0.759 and 0.703, respectively). Volume assessment by SOS presented overall slightly higher reliability than the diametric method. Overall, the reliability between the two methods was good when measured by the same reader (ICC: 0.988, 0.945 and 0.962, for the preoperative, first and third postoperative MRI, respectively).
conclusionThe preoperative intra- and inter-rater reliabilities were satisfactory for both the SOS and diametric method. Postoperative MRI scans showed poorer reliability, suggesting that measurements at these time points should be interpreted with care. For each MRI scan, reliability between methods was satisfactory when investigated by the same reader.
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.