Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31700612›Full record

ReviewF1000Research2019

Peripheral nerve magnetic resonance imaging.

Yongsheng Chen, E Mark Haacke, Jun Li

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in F1000Research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Imaging of elbow entrapment neuropathies.Insights into imaging · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Imaging diagnosis in peripheral nerve injury.Frontiers in neurology · 2023
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yongsheng ChenDepartment of Neurology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, 48201, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7114-5731
E Mark HaackeDepartment of Radiology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, 48201, USA.
Jun LiDepartment of Neurology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, 48201, USA.
Wayne State University · US

Funding

Pathophysiology of Conduction Block in HNPP.R01NS066927 · NINDS · WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY · PI LI, JUN · 2010 to 2019
$3.5M
BLRD VA I01 BX003385NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS066927
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been used extensively in revealing pathological changes in the central nervous system. However, to date, MRI is very much underutilized in evaluating the peripheral nervous system (PNS). This underutilization is generally due to two perceived weaknesses in MRI: first, the need for very high resolution to image the small structures within the peripheral nerves to visualize morphological changes; second, the lack of normative data in MRI of the PNS and this makes reliable interpretation of the data difficult. This article reviews current state-of-the-art capabilities in

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingHumansPeripheral NervesPeripheral Nervous System DiseasesCharcot-Marie-Tooth DiseaseMagnetic Resonance ImagingPeripheral NervesPeripheral Nervous SystemPeripheral NeuropathySciatic Nerve

Identifiers

PMID31700612
PMCPMC6820826
OpenAlexW2982560994

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.