Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34198589›Full record

ReviewCancers2021

Meta-Analysis of the Accuracy of Abbreviated Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance: Non-Contrast versus Hepatobiliary Phase-Abbreviated Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Dong Hwan Kim, Sang Hyun Choi, Ju Hyun Shim, So Yeon Kim, Seung Soo Lee, Jae Ho Byun, Joon-Il Choi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Clinical Significance of Liver MR Imaging.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2023
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Dong Hwan KimDepartment of Radiology, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul 06591, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-2932-2367
Sang Hyun ChoiAsan Medical Center, Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul 05505, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-6898-6617
Ju Hyun ShimAsan Medical Center, Department of Gastroenterology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul 05505, Korea.
So Yeon KimAsan Medical Center, Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul 05505, Korea.
Seung Soo LeeAsan Medical Center, Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul 05505, Korea.
Jae Ho ByunAsan Medical Center, Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul 05505, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-2076-9979
Joon-Il ChoiDepartment of Radiology, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul 06591, Korea.

Funding

National Research Foundation of Korea NRF-2019R1G1A1099743
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We aimed to determine the performance of surveillance abbreviated magnetic resonance imaging (AMRI) for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and to compare the performance of surveillance AMRI according to different protocols. Original research studies reporting the performance of surveillance AMRI for the detection of HCC were identified in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of surveillance AMRI were calculated using a hierarchical model. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of contrast-enhanced hepatobiliary phase (HBP)-AMRI and non-contrast (NC)-AMRI were calculated and compared using bivariate meta-regression. Ten studies, including 1547 patients, reported the accuracy of surveillance AMRI. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of surveillance AMRI for detecting any-stage HCC were 86% (95% confidence interval (CI), 80-90%;

Indexed as

hepatocellular carcinomaliverMRIsensitivityspecificitysurveillancesystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34198589
PMCPMC8231787

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.