SynthesisBMJ open2019
Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging texture analysis in differentiating low-grade from high-grade gliomas: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 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.
- The Value of Texture Analysis in Postoperative Recurrence of Chronic Subdural Hematoma.Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society · 2025Article
- Unveiling degenerative bone changes in the condyle: a texture analysis approach using cone-beam computed tomography.Acta cirurgica brasileira · 2025Article
- Influence of maternal psychological distress during COVID-19 pandemic on placental morphometry and texture.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- A Novel System for Precise Grading of Glioma.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- MRI biomarkers in neuro-oncology.Nature reviews. Neurology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTexture analysis (TA) is a method used for quantifying the spatial distributions of intensities in images using scanning software. MRI TA could be applied to grade gliomas. This meta-analysis was performed for assessing the accuracy of MRI TA in differentiating low-grade gliomas from high-grade ones.
methodsPubMed, Cochrane Library, Science Direct and Embase were searched for identifying suitable studies from their inception to 1 September 2018. The quality of the studies was evaluated on the basis of the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies guidelines. We estimated the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR) and diagnostic OR (DOR) using the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) for identifying the accuracy of MRI TA in grading gliomas. Fagan nomogram was applied for assessing the clinical utility of TA.
resultsSix studies including 440 patients were included and analysed. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR and DOR with 95% CIs were 0.93 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.96), 0.86 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.89), 6.4 (95% CI 4.8 to 8.6), 0.08 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.15) and 78 (95% CI 39 to 156), respectively. The SROC curve showed an area under the curve of 0.96 (95% CI 0.93 to 0.97). Deeks test confirmed no significant publication bias in all studies. Fagan nomogram revealed that the post-test probability increased by 43% in patients with positive pre-test.
conclusionsThe findings of this meta-analysis suggested that MRI TA has high accuracy in differentiating low-grade gliomas from high-grade ones. A standardised methodology is warranted to guide the use of this technique for clinical decision-making.
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.