Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32936418›Full record

ReviewAbdominal radiology (New York)2021

State of the art in abdominal MRI structured reporting: a review.

Arnaldo Stanzione, Francesca Boccadifuoco, Renato Cuocolo, Valeria Romeo, Pier Paolo Mainenti, Arturo Brunetti, Simone Maurea

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Double trouble - identifying rating inconsistencies due to double ratings of the "Show backbone" study.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Arnaldo StanzioneDepartment of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, Italy.
Francesca BoccadifuocoDepartment of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, Italy.
Renato CuocoloDepartment of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, University of Naples "Federico II", Via S. Pansini, 5, 80131, Naples, Italy. renato.cuocolo@unina.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1452-1574
Valeria RomeoDepartment of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, Italy.
Pier Paolo MainentiInstitute of Biostructures and Bioimaging, National Research Council, Naples, Italy.
Arturo BrunettiDepartment of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, Italy.
Simone MaureaDepartment of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, Italy.
University of Naples Federico II · ITFederico II University Hospital · ITInstitute of Biostructure and Bioimaging · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the management of several abdominal disorders, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has the potential to significantly improve patient's outcome due to its diagnostic accuracy leading to more appropriate treatment choice. However, its clinical value heavily relies on the quality and quantity of diagnostic information that radiologists manage to convey through their reports. To solve issues such as ambiguity and lack of comprehensiveness that can occur with conventional narrative reports, the adoption of structured reporting has been proposed. Using a checklist and standardized lexicon, structured reports are designed to increase clarity while assuring that all key imaging findings related to a specific disorder are included. Unfortunately, structured reports have their limitations too, such as risk of undue report simplification and poor template plasticity. Their adoption is also far from widespread, and probably the ideal balance between radiologist autonomy and report consistency of has yet to be found. In this article, we aimed to provide an overview of structured reporting proposals for abdominal MRI and of works assessing its value in comparison to conventional free-text reporting. While for several abdominal disorders there are structured templates that have been endorsed by scientific societies and their adoption might be beneficial, stronger evidence confirming their imperativeness and added value in terms of clinical practice is needed, especially regarding the improvement of patient outcome.

Indexed as

Radiology Information SystemsHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingRadiologistsAbdominal MRIEvidence-based medicineReport qualityStandardized lexiconStructured report

Identifiers

PMID32936418
PMCPMC7940284
OpenAlexW3087741484

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.