ReviewBJR open2019
Imaging biomarkers in upper gastrointestinal cancers.
Review in BJR open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Proposal of a novel Artificial Intelligence Distribution Service platform for healthcare.F1000Research · 2021Pooled it
- Article
- Which modality is better to diagnose high-grade transformation in retroperitoneal liposarcoma? Comparison of computed tomography, positron emission tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging.International journal of clinical oncology · 2023Article
- Radiomics in Lung Metastases: A Systematic Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Review
- A diagnosis model in nasopharyngeal carcinoma based on PET/MRI radiomics and semiquantitative parameters.BMC medical imaging · 2022Article
- CanCancers · 2022Article
- Usefulness of MRI-based radiomic features for distinguishing Warthin tumor from pleomorphic adenoma: performance assessment using T2-weighted and post-contrast T1-weighted MR images.European journal of radiology open · 2022Article
- Radiomics and Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Rectal Cancer: From Engineering to Clinical Practice.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Human, All Too Human? An All-Around Appraisal of the "Artificial Intelligence Revolution" in Medical Imaging.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Review
- Advanced endoscopic imaging for detecting and guiding therapy of early neoplasias of the esophagus.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2020Review
- Can Magnetic Resonance Radiomics Analysis Discriminate Parotid Gland Tumors? A Pilot Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In parallel with the increasingly widespread availability of high performance imaging platforms and recent progresses in pathobiological characterisation and treatment of gastrointestinal malignancies, imaging biomarkers have become a major research topic due to their potential to provide additional quantitative information to conventional imaging modalities that can improve accuracy at staging and follow-up, predict outcome, and guide treatment planning in an individualised manner. The aim of this review is to briefly examine the status of current knowledge about imaging biomarkers in the field of upper gastrointestinal cancers, highlighting their potential applications and future perspectives in patient management from diagnosis onwards.
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.