ReviewClinical neuroradiology2019
Incidentalomas in Spine and Spinal Cord Imaging.
Review in Clinical neuroradiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Benign incidental do-not-touch bone lesions.The British journal of radiology · 2023Review
- Dark-Lumen Magnetic Resonance Image Based on Artificial Intelligence Algorithm in Differential Diagnosis of Colon Cancer.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2022Article
- Extraspinal findings prevalence and clinical significance in 4250 lumbar spine MRI exams.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Consequences of health condition labelling: protocol for a systematic scoping review.BMJ open · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Incidentalomas are common in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the spine. These incidental findings (IFs) can be seen involving the spinal cord, nerve root, vertebral body, posterior arch and the extraspinal region. This review article describes the imaging findings, stratifies the IFs similar to the computed tomography (CT) colonography reporting and data system and briefly mentions the current recommendations for further evaluation and management of IFs. Radiologists are the first to detect these lesions, suggest further evaluation and management of IFs. It is therefore mandatory for them to be aware of recommendations in clinical practice in order to avoid increased patient anxiety, excessive healthcare expenditure and inadvertent therapeutic procedures.
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.