ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2020
Interobserver Reliability of Endoscopic Ultrasonography: Literature Review.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Survey on Inter- and Intra-Observer Variations of the Ultrasound Assessment of Dog Pancreases.Veterinary radiology & ultrasound : the official journal of the American College of Veterinary Radiology and the International Veterinary Radiology Association · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Imaging of Pancreatic and Biliary Involvement in IgG4-Related Disease: Key Imaging Features, Diagnostic Criteria and Differential Diagnosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Current Approaches of Pancreatic Cancer Surveillance in High-Risk Individuals.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2025Review
- Interobserver variability in lymph node evaluation with endoscopic ultrasonography in cholangiocarcinoma.Endoscopy international open · 2025Article
- Proposal and Validation of New Diagnostic Criteria for Diagnostic Weights of Endoultrasonographic Findings for Early Chronic Pancreatitis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Review
- The Risk Factors for Progression to Chronic Pancreatitis in Patients with Past-History of Acute Pancreatitis: A Retrospective Analysis Based on Mechanistic Definition.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Recent Advances in Endosonography-Elastography: Literature Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Interobserver Reliability of the Endoscopic Ultrasound Criteria for the Diagnosis of Early Chronic Pancreatitis: Comparison between the 2009 and 2019 Japanese Diagnostic Criteria.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has been applied to the diagnosis of various digestive disorders. Although it has been widely accepted and its diagnostic value is high, the dependence of EUS diagnosis on image interpretation done by the endosonographer has persisted as an important difficulty. Consequently, high interobserver reliability (IOR) in EUS diagnosis is important to demonstrate the reliability of EUS diagnosis. We reviewed the literature on the IOR of EUS diagnosis for various diseases such as chronic pancreatitis, pancreatic solid/cystic mass, lymphadenopathy, and gastrointestinal and subepithelial lesions. The IOR of EUS diagnosis differs depending on the disease; moreover, EUS findings with high IOR and those with IOR that was not necessarily high were used as diagnostic criteria. Therefore, to further increase the value of EUS diagnosis, EUS diagnostic criteria with high diagnostic characteristics based on EUS findings with high IOR must be established.
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.