ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2021
A bicentric retrospective analysis of clinical utility of
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Complex implementation factors demonstrated when evaluating cost-effectiveness and monitoring racial disparities associated with [Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Differences in Failure-Free Survival After Salvage Radiotherapy Guided by Conventional Imaging VersusJournal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2023Article
- Management Impact of Metachronous Oligometastatic Disease Identified onMolecular imaging and biology · 2022Article
- Detection Rate and Clinical Impact of PET/CT withBiomedicines · 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
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose
methodsThis retrospective study included patients from two tertiary institutions who underwent
resultsOne hundred patients were included in this study. The overall detection rate on a patient-level was 79% (79/100).
conclusion
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.