ReviewDer Radiologe2021
[PI-RADS 2.1 and structured reporting of magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate].
Review in Der Radiologe, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of data fusion strategies for automated prostate lesion detection using mpMRI correlated with whole mount histology.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2024Article
- Using "Age and Total-PSA" as the Main Indicators: The Results of Taizhou Integrated Prostate Screening (No 2).American journal of men's healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
clinical/methodological issueThe detection of clinically significant prostate cancers while simultaneously avoiding over-diagnosing tumors with low malignant potential is a challenge in clinical practice. STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL
methodsMultiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in accordance with the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) guidelines is accepted as standard-of-care with both urologists and radiologists. METHODOLOGICAL INNOVATIONS: The PI-RADS guidelines have been updated to version 2.1, including revised technical recommendations and changes to the scoring of lesions. PERFORMANCE: The PI-RADS guidelines have had great impact on the standardization of multiparametric prostate MRI and offer templates for structured reporting. This simplifies communication with the referring physician. ACHIEVEMENTS: The new version 2.1 of the guidelines represents an evolutionary improvement of the widely accepted version 2.0. Several aspects of reporting have been revised-however, some pre-known limitations persist, which will require further refinement in the future.
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.