Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31808952›Full record

ReviewBritish journal of haematology2020

The power and potential of integrated diagnostics in acute myeloid leukaemia.

Torsten Haferlach, Ines Schmidts

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in British journal of haematology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Diagnostic value of circular RNAs as promising hematological biomarkers in acute myeloid leukemia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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.

Torsten HaferlachMLL Munich Leukemia Laboratory, Munich, Germany.
Ines SchmidtsMLL Munich Leukemia Laboratory, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The field of acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) diagnostics, initially based solely on morphological assessment, has integrated more and more disciplines. Today, state-of-the-art AML diagnostics relies on cytomorphology, cytochemistry, immunophenotyping, cytogenetics and molecular genetics. Only the integration of all of these methods allows for a comprehensive and complementary characterisation of each case, which is prerequisite for optimal AML diagnosis and management. Here, we will review why multidisciplinary diagnostics is mandatory today and will gain even more importance in the future, especially in the context of precision medicine. We will discuss ideas and strategies that are likely to shape and improve multidisciplinary diagnostics in AML and may even overcome some of today's gold standards. This includes recent technical advances that provide genome-wide molecular insights. The enormous amount of data obtained by these latter techniques represents a great challenge, but also a unique chance. We will reflect on how this increase in knowledge can be incorporated into the routine to pave the way for personalised medicine in AML.

Indexed as

Cytogenetic AnalysisImmunophenotypingPrecision MedicineGenome-Wide Association StudyHumansLeukemia, Myeloid, Acuteacute myeloid leukaemiaAML diagnosis and managementartificial intelligencemultidisciplinary diagnosticsprecision medicine

Identifiers

PMID31808952
PMCPMC6973013

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.