ArticleActa radiologica (Stockholm, Sweden : 1987)2022
Radiology reporting in rectal cancer using MRI: adherence to national template for structured reporting.
Article in Acta radiologica (Stockholm, Sweden : 1987), 2022. 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.
- Standardized reporting of extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
- Radiology reporting in rectal cancer using magnetic resonance imaging: Comparison of reporting completeness between different reporting styles and structure.Acta radiologica open · 2024Article
- ESR paper on structured reporting in radiology-update 2023.Insights into imaging · 2023Article
- Pearls and pitfalls of structured staging and reporting of rectal cancer on MRI: an international multireader study.The British journal of radiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn 2014, a national workshop program was initiated and a reporting template and manual for rectal cancer primary staging using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was introduced and made available by the national Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of the national template program by identify if there was a gap between the content in Swedish MRI reports from 2016 and the national reporting template from 2014. The aim was to explore and compare differences in content in reporting practice in different hospitals in relation to the national reporting template, with focus on: (i) identifying any implementational differences in reporting styles; and (ii) evaluating if reporting completeness vary based on such implementational differences. MATERIAL AND
methodsA total of 250 MRI reports from 10 hospitals in four healthcare regions in Sweden were collected. Reports were analyzed using qualitative content analysis with a deductive thematic coding scheme based on the national reporting template.
resultsThree different implemented reporting styles were identified with variations of content coverage in relation to the template: (i) standardized and structured protocol (reporting style A); (ii) standardized semi-structured free-text (reporting style B); and (iii) regular free-text (reporting style C). The relative completeness of reporting practice of rectal cancer staging in relation to the national reporting template were 92.9% for reporting style A, 77.5% for reporting style B, and 63.9% for reporting style C.
conclusionThe implementation of template-based reporting according to reporting style A is a key factor to conform to evidence-based practice for rectal cancer reporting using MRI.
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.