Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35160067›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

Comparison between Two Different Scanners for the Evaluation of the Role of

Francesco Dondi, Nadia Pasinetti, Roberto Gatta, Domenico Albano, Raffaele Giubbini, Francesco Bertagna

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Visual analysis of [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. New thresholds in semi-quantitative [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Could [Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
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

6 authors.

Francesco DondiNuclear Medicine, Università degli Studi di Brescia and ASST Spedali Civili Brescia, 25123 Brescia, Italy.
Nadia PasinettiRadiation Oncology Department, ASST Valcamonica Esine and Università degli Studi di Brescia, 25040 Brescia, Italy.
Roberto GattaDipartimento di Scienze Cliniche e Sperimentali dell'Università degli Studi di Brescia, 25123 Brescia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-4716-9925
Domenico AlbanoNuclear Medicine, Università degli Studi di Brescia and ASST Spedali Civili Brescia, 25123 Brescia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0810-6494
Raffaele GiubbiniNuclear Medicine, Università degli Studi di Brescia and ASST Spedali Civili Brescia, 25123 Brescia, Italy.
Francesco BertagnaNuclear Medicine, Università degli Studi di Brescia and ASST Spedali Civili Brescia, 25123 Brescia, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare two different tomographs for the evaluation of the role of semiquantitative PET/CT parameters and radiomics features (RF) in the prediction of thyroid incidentalomas (TIs) at

Indexed as

18F-FDGPET/CTpositron emission tomographyradiomicstexture analysisthyroid cancerthyroid incidentalomas

Identifiers

PMID35160067
PMCPMC8836668

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.