ArticleThe British journal of radiology2019
Comparison of 3T diffusion-weighted MRI and
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Whole-body imaging for distant staging of bone chondrosarcoma: a systematic review.La Radiologia medica · 2025Pooled it
- Surrogating tumour cell density in head and neck cancer: [Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- The expression of Ki-67 and Glypican -3 in hepatocellular carcinoma was evaluated by comparing DWI andFrontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- The role ofThe British journal of radiology · 2022Article
- Volumetric histograms-based analysis of apparent diffusion coefficients and standard uptake values for the assessment of pediatric sarcoma at staging: preliminary results of a PET/MRI study.La Radiologia medica · 2021Article
- Does the SUVmax of FDG-PET/CT Correlate with the ADC Values of DWI in Musculoskeletal Malignancies?Journal of the Belgian Society of Radiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) on 3T MR imaging including diffusion-weighted MR imaging (DWI) correlate with the standardized uptake value (SUV) on 18F-FDG PET/CT in musculoskeletal tumours.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 57 patients (36 males, 21 females, mean age 54 years, range 12-90 years) with pathologically confirmed soft tissue (
resultsThere was inverse correlation between SUV
conclusionADC at 3T MR DWI and SUV at 18F-FDG PET/CT have an inverse correlation in musculoskeletal tumours. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Our study showed that ADC at 3T DWI and SUV at 18F-FDG PET/CT had an inverse correlation in musculoskeletal tumours.
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.