SynthesisRadiation oncology (London, England)2020
Can
Synthesis in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Head-to-Head Comparison ofFrontiers in oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Pelvic lymph node management in prostate cancer: a narrative review.Prostate international · 2025Review
- Article
- Staging Accuracy and Prognostic Value of Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen PET/CT Strongly Depends on Lymph Node Tumor Burden.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- The Application of Prostate Specific Membrane Antigen in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Prostate Cancer: Status and Challenge.OncoTargets and therapy · 2024Review
- New perspectives on metabolic imaging in the management of prostate cancer in 2022: A focus on radiolabeled PSMA‑PET/CT (Review).Molecular and clinical oncology · 2023Review
- Targeted Molecular Imaging as a Biomarker in Urologic Oncology.The Urologic clinics of North America · 2023Review
- Application of targeted diagnosis of PSMA in the modality shift of prostate cancer diagnosis: a review.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- The future of PSMA PET and WB MRI as next-generation imaging tools in prostate cancer.Nature reviews. Urology · 2022Review
- Molecular Imaging in Primary Staging of Prostate Cancer Patients: Current Aspects and Future Trends.Cancers · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis article aims to evaluate the diagnostic value of
methodsWe systematically retrieved articles from Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Database, PubMed. The time limit is from the creation of the database until June 2019, and Stata 15 was used for calculation and statistical analyses.
resultsSensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio (PLR, NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) be used to evaluate the diagnostic value. A total of 10 studies were included in our meta-analysis, which included 701 individuals. The results of each consolidated summary are as follows: sensitivity of 0.84 (95% CI 0.55-0.95), specificity of 0.95 (95% CI 0.87-0.98), PLR and NLR was 17.19 (95% CI 6.27, 47.17) and 0.17 (95% CI 0.05-0.56), respectively. DOR of 100 (95% CI 18-545), AUC of 0.97 (95% CI 0.95-0.98).
conclusionOur study demonstrates that
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.