ArticleMedicine2020
Magnetic resonance imaging for the non-invasive diagnosis in patients with ovarian cancer: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Medicine, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn developed nations, ovarian cancer has resulted in the most fatalities from gynecological cancer. Laparoscopy is primarily utilized as the test to diagnose ovarian cancer. Besides being costly, there are surgical risks associated with laparoscopies. At present, clinical practitioners have access to non-invasive tests for diagnosing ovarian cancer. This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for diagnosing ovarian cancer.
methodsIn order to obtain eligible studies, cross-sectional studies or randomized controlled trials are searched in electronic databases. The databases include 5 English databases (PubMed, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and Web of Science) and 3 Chinese databases (China Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and WanFang database). The databases are searched from their origin to October 2020. Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 is used to assess the methodological quality of the selected studies. RevMan 5.3 and SAS NLMIXED software are used to assess the data synthesis, sensitivity analysis, and risk of bias assessment.
resultsThis study evaluates the pooled diagnostic value of MRI for diagnosing ovarian cancer.
conclusionsThis study will summarize previously published evidence of MRI in relation to diagnosing ovarian cancer. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Since this study does not utilize data from patients, this protocol does not require ethical approval. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/A6SPQ (https://osf.io/a6spq).
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.