Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32492863›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2020

Cost-Effectiveness of the Manchester Approach to Identifying Lynch Syndrome in Women with Endometrial Cancer.

Tristan M Snowsill, Neil A J Ryan, Emma J Crosbie

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Universal testing in endometrial cancer in Sweden.Hereditary cancer in clinical practice · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. A Focused Clinical Review of Lynch Syndrome.Cancer management and research · 2023
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Hereditary determinants of gynecological cancer and recommendations.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Response to Benusiglio et al.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2020
    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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Tristan M SnowsillHealth Economics Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter EX1 2LU, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7406-2819
Neil A J RyanDivision of Evolution and Genomic Medicine, University of Manchester, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester M13 9WL, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3117-3257
Emma J CrosbieDivision of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester M13 9WL, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0284-8630
Manchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBUniversity of Exeter · GBUniversity of Manchester · GB

Funding

Department of Health NIHR-CS-012-009Medical Research Council MR/M018431/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lynch syndrome (LS) is a hereditary cancer syndrome responsible for 3% of all endometrial cancer and 5% in those aged under 70 years. It is unclear whether universal testing for LS in endometrial cancer patients would be cost-effective. The Manchester approach to identifying LS in endometrial cancer patients uses immunohistochemistry (IHC) to detect mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency, incorporates testing for

Indexed as

cost-effectiveness analysisdecision analytic modelendometrial cancerLynch syndromereflex testing

Identifiers

PMID32492863
PMCPMC7356917
OpenAlexW3031830549

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.