ReviewThe British journal of radiology2021
Focus on the expected quality of reporting in SBRT/radiosurgery prospective studies: how far have we come in 30 years?
Review in The British journal of radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Approaches to Oligometastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.Current oncology reports · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe aimed at describing and assessing the quality of reporting in all published prospective trials about radiosurgery (SRS) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT).
methodsThe Medline database was searched for. The reporting of study design, patients' and radiotherapy characteristics, previous and concurrent cancer treatments, acute and late toxicities and assessment of quality of life were collected.
results114 articles - published between 1989 and 2019 - were analysed. 21 trials were randomised (18.4%). Randomisation information was unavailable in 59.6% of the publications. Data about randomisation, ITT analysis and whether the study was multicentre or not, had been significantly less reported during the 2010-2019 publication period than before (respectively 29.4%
conclusionIt seems necessary to meet stricter specifications to improve the quality of reporting. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Our work results in one of the rare analyses of radiosurgery and SBRT publications. Literature must include necessary information to first, ensure treatments can be compared and reproduced and secondly, to permit to decide on new standards of care.
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.