ArticleScientific reports2019
Intra- and interobserver reproducibility of pancreatic perfusion by computed tomography.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Analyzing the effect of neoadjuvant stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy on pancreatic tumor perfusion using computed tomography perfusion.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Quantitative Conspicuity of Pancreatic Canine Insulinoma: A Comparison of Dynamic 4D CT and Dual-Source, Dual-Energy Bolus-Triggered Multiphase CT Imaging.Veterinary sciences · 2025Article
- Assessing the inter-observer and intra-observer reliability of radiographic measurements for size-specific dose estimates.BMC medical imaging · 2024Article
- Decrease in Pancreatic Perfusion of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Detected by Perfusion Computed Tomography.Journal of clinical imaging science · 2021Article
- Advanced imaging techniques for chronic pancreatitis.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2020Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to measure intra- and interobserver agreement among radiologists in the assessment of pancreatic perfusion by computed tomography (CT). Thirty-nine perfusion CT scans were analyzed. The following parameters were measured by three readers: blood flow (BF), blood volume (BV), mean transit time (MTT) and time to peak (TTP). Statistical analysis was performed using the Bland-Altman method, linear mixed model analysis, and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). There was no significant intraobserver variability for the readers regarding BF, BV or TTP. There were session effects for BF in the pancreatic body and MTT in the pancreatic tail and whole pancreas. There were reader effects for BV in the pancreatic head, pancreatic body and whole pancreas. There were no effects for the interaction between session and reader for any perfusion parameter. ICCs showed substantial agreement for the interobserver measurements and moderate to substantial agreement for the intraobserver measurements, with the exception of MTT. In conclusion, satisfactory reproducibility of measurements was observed for TTP in all pancreatic regions, for BF in the head and BV in the tail, and these parameters seem to ensure a reasonable estimation of pancreatic perfusion.
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.