Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30456183›Full record

ReviewTranslational andrology and urology2018

A pictorial review of bladder cancer nodal metastases.

Prasad R Shankar, Daniel Barkmeier, Lubomir Hadjiiski, Richard H Cohan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Translational andrology and urology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The Added-value of StagingMolecular imaging and radionuclide therapy · 2024
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
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.

Prasad R ShankarDepartment of Radiology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Daniel BarkmeierDepartment of Radiology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Lubomir HadjiiskiDepartment of Radiology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Richard H CohanDepartment of Radiology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lymph node involvement in bladder cancer is common and has prognostic implications. Early and accurate identification of metastatic lymph nodes is, therefore, important in ensuring appropriate patient triage and management. The purpose of this review is to provide a pictorial and educational overview of the staging and imaging appearance of metastatic lymph nodes in bladder cancer. Additionally, a secondary aim of this manuscript is to provide a review of the diagnostic accuracy of common imaging modalities available for detecting metastatic lymph nodes in affected patients.

Indexed as

Bladder cancerlymph node metastasisnodal metastasisnodal stagingurothelial cancer

Identifiers

PMID30456183
PMCPMC6212631

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.