Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30932247›Full record

SynthesisJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2019

Whole-body MRI for preventive health screening: A systematic review of the literature.

Robert M Kwee, Thomas C Kwee

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06931561 (Occupational Cancer Screening in Firefighters), which is not on this map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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.

NCT06931561 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Occupational Cancer Screening in Firefighters: A Pilot Study Within the Inova Health System

TypeinterventionalSponsorInova Health Care ServicesRan2025 to 2028Enrolled800ConditionsCancerArmsWhole Body MRI, Whole Body Ultrasound, MCD Assay, Occupational Exposure Questionnaire
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The rise of commodity care.Frontiers in health services · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Technical Advancements in Abdominal Diffusion-weighted Imaging.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Robert M KweeDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Zuyderland Medical Center, Heerlen/Sittard/Geleen, The Netherlands.
Thomas C KweeDepartment of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
University Medical Center Groningen · NLZuyderland Medisch Centrum · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe yield of whole-body MRI for preventive health screening is currently not completely clear. PURPOSE: To systematically review the prevalence of whole-body MRI findings in asymptomatic subjects. STUDY TYPE: Systematic review and meta-analysis. SUBJECTS: MEDLINE and Embase were searched for original studies reporting whole-body MRI findings in asymptomatic adults without known disease, syndrome, or genetic mutation. Twelve studies, comprising 5373 asymptomatic subjects, were included. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 1.5T or 3.0T, whole-body MRI. ASSESSMENT: The whole-body MRI literature findings were extracted and reviewed by two radiologists in consensus for designation as either critical or indeterminate incidental finding. STATISTICAL TESTS: Data were pooled using a random effects model on the assumption that most subjects had ≤1 critical or indeterminate incidental finding. Heterogeneity was assessed by the I

resultsPooled prevalences of critical and indeterminate incidental findings together and separately were 32.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 18.3%, 50.1%), 13.4% (95% CI: 9.0%, 19.5%), and 13.9% (95% CI: 5.4%, 31.3%), respectively. There was substantial between-study heterogeneity (I DATA

conclusionPrevalence of critical and indeterminate incidental whole-body MRI findings in asymptomatic subjects is overall substantial and with variability dependent to some degree on the protocol. Verification data are lacking. The proportion of false-positive findings appears to be substantial. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Technical Efficacy: Stage 3 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;50:1489-1503.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingWhole Body ImagingEarly Detection of CancerFalse Positive ReactionsHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedNeoplasmsPrevalencePreventive MedicineReproducibility of Resultsasymptomatichealth check-upscreeningwhole-body MRI

Identifiers

PMID30932247
PMCPMC6850647
OpenAlexW2927125954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.