Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30820722›Full record

Observational studyEuropean radiology2019

Adnexal mass staging CT with a disease-specific structured report compared to simple structured report.

Andrea Franconeri, Johannes Boos, Jieming Fang, Anuradha Shenoy-Bhangle, Michelle Perillo, Catherine J Wei, Leslie Garrett, Katharine Esselen, Liu Fong, Olga R Brook

Abstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in European radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Use and Perceptions of Oncology CT Structured Reports in Australia and New Zealand.Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

10 authors.

Andrea FranconeriDepartment of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 330 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Johannes BoosDepartment of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 330 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Jieming FangDepartment of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 330 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Anuradha Shenoy-BhangleDepartment of Gynecology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Michelle PerilloDepartment of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 330 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Catherine J WeiDepartment of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 330 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Leslie GarrettDepartment of Gynecology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Katharine EsselenDepartment of Gynecology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Liu FongDepartment of Gynecology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Olga R BrookDepartment of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 330 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA. obrook@bidmc.harvard.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo assess a disease-specific structured report (dsSR) for CT staging of ovarian malignancy compared to a simple structured report (sSR).

methodsThis is a HIPAA-compliant, IRB-approved study with waiver of informed consent. An adnexal mass-specific structured reporting CT template was developed in collaboration between gynecologic oncologists and diagnostic radiologists. The study population included 24 consecutive women who had a staging CT prior to undergoing debulking surgery for a primary ovarian malignancy. Objective evaluation by radiologists for the presence of 19 key features and subjective evaluation by gynecologic oncologists were performed to assess the clarity and usefulness for procedural planning of dsSR and sSR. Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were assessed using operating room notes and pathology reports as the reference standard.

resultsFewer key features were missing from dsSR than sSR: 0.2 ± 0.8 (range 0-2) vs.10.2 ± 1.7 (range 7-14), respectively (p < 0.0001). Compared to sSR, gynecologic oncologists deemed dsSR more helpful (4.3 ± 0.7 vs. 3.7 ± 0.8, p < 0.0001) and easier to understand (4.3 ± 0.6 vs. 3.9 ± 0.7, p = 0.0057) (on a scale 0-5, 0 not helpful/very difficult to understand; 5 extremely helpful/very clear to understand). Gynecologic oncologists reported a higher rate of potential to modify their surgical approach based on dsSR (33-42%) compared to sSR (13-17%), p = 0.004.

conclusionsDisease-specific structured reports were more reliable than simple structured reports in describing key features essential for procedural planning. dsSR was described as more helpful and easier to understand and more likely to lead to modification of the surgical approach by gynecologic oncologists compared to sSR. KEY POINTS: • Disease-specific structured report is easier to understand and more helpful for planning gynecological surgery as compared with simple structured report. • Disease-specific structured report for pre-operative evaluation of ovarian cancer provides better documentation of essential features required for surgical planning as compared with simple structured report. • Disease-specific structured report has the potential to modify the surgical approach as assessed by gynecologic oncologists.

Indexed as

Adnexal DiseasesAdultFemaleHumansMedical RecordsMiddle AgedMultidetector Computed TomographyNeoplasm StagingOvarian NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityAdnexal diseasesCancer stagingComputed tomographyPatient-centered radiologyStructured reports

Identifiers

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.