Characterization and Clinical Utility of

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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

1. The Value of Cell-Free Circulating DNA Profiling in Patients with Skin Diseases.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023
   Review
2. Tumor-Type Agnostic, Targeted Therapies: BRAF Inhibitors Join the Group.Acta medica academica · 2022
   Review
3. Perspectives in Melanoma: meeting report from the Melanoma Bridge (December 2nd - 4th, 2021, Italy).Journal of translational medicine · 2022
   Article
4. Clinical Utility of Liquid Biopsy to Detect BRAF and NRAS Mutations in Stage III/IV Melanoma Patients by Using Real-Time PCR.Cancers · 2022
   Article

Corrections and comments

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

Authors and funding

9 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Funding

Abstract

Indexed as