ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2021
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- FDG-PET/MRI in colorectal cancer care: an updated systematic review.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Pooled it
- Diagnostic performance of whole-body [European radiology · 2024Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence support in MR imaging of incidental renal masses: an early health technology assessment.European radiology · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of MRI, CE-CT and 18F-FDG PET/CT for detecting colorectal liver metastases eligible for hepatic resection.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Added value of quantitative, multiparametric 18F-FDG PET/MRI in the locoregional staging of rectal cancer.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022Article
- Comparison of CT, MRI, and F-18 FDG PET/CT for initial N-staging of oral squamous cell carcinoma: a cost-effectiveness analysis.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022Article
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 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeRectal cancer is one of the most frequent causes of cancer-related morbidity and mortality in the world. Correct identification of the TNM state in primary staging of rectal cancer has critical implications on patient management. Initial evaluations revealed a high sensitivity and specificity for whole-body PET/MRI in the detection of metastases allowing for metastasis-directed therapy regimens. Nevertheless, its cost-effectiveness compared with that of standard-of-care imaging (SCI) using pelvic MRI + chest and abdominopelvic CT is yet to be investigated. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyze the cost-effectiveness of whole-body
methodsFor estimation of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and lifetime costs of diagnostic modalities, a decision model including whole-body
resultsIn the base-case scenario, the strategy whole-body
conclusionBased on the results of the analysis, use of whole-body
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.