Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31966931›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical imaging science2020

Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Diaphragm: From Normal to Pathologic Findings.

Giuseppe Cicero, Silvio Mazziotti, Alfredo Blandino, Francesca Granata, Michele Gaeta

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical imaging science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. 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

5 authors.

Giuseppe CiceroSection of Radiological Sciences, Department of Biomedical Sciences and Morphological and Functional Imaging, University of Messina, Messina, Italy.
Silvio MazziottiSection of Radiological Sciences, Department of Biomedical Sciences and Morphological and Functional Imaging, University of Messina, Messina, Italy.
Alfredo BlandinoSection of Radiological Sciences, Department of Biomedical Sciences and Morphological and Functional Imaging, University of Messina, Messina, Italy.
Francesca GranataSection of Radiological Sciences, Department of Biomedical Sciences and Morphological and Functional Imaging, University of Messina, Messina, Italy.
Michele GaetaSection of Radiological Sciences, Department of Biomedical Sciences and Morphological and Functional Imaging, University of Messina, Messina, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The diaphragm is a musculotendinous structure that divides the chest from the abdomen. Its motility, unintentional or voluntary, is crucial for the physiologic respiratory function due to its contribution to lung volume expansion and contraction. Therefore, diaphragmatic dysfunction may cause a respiratory failure without any pathology of the lungs. Different imaging modalities can be employed for diaphragmatic evaluation. Among all, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has demonstrated to be the most accurate technique in providing a morphologic and functional assessment of the diaphragm as well as information about the adjacent structures. However, its diagnostic value is still underrated and its performance is often far from the daily clinical practice. Backward, physicians and radiologists should be aware of the undoubted advantages of MRI and confident about the normal or pathologic imaging features, to avoid misdiagnosis.

Indexed as

DiaphragmDiaphragmatic diseasesMagnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

PMID31966931
PMCPMC6969382

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.