ArticleZhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer2020
[Chinese Expert Consensus Statement on Clinical Evaluation System of Medical Endoscopy].
Article in Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nowadays, there is a rising development and popularity of medical endoscopes. The international brand dominates the endoscope market. The market size of domestic brands is also growing rapidly. The electronic technologies of hard or soft endoscopes are developing rapidly and gradually approaching to the advanced level in worldwide. However, at present, there is a lack of relevant standards for national standards and industry regulations for evaluating medical endoscopes, and also lacking of quantitative and clear understanding of the gap between domestic and foreign products. It is urgently necessary to give a comprehensive and accurate evaluation to the medical endoscopes. In this context, the expert group has established a scientific, systematic, and applicable standardized medical endoscopy clinical evaluation system to standardize various endoscopic evaluation indicators.
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.