ArticleLa Radiologia medica2022
An approach to evaluate the quality of radiological reports in Head and Neck cancer loco-regional staging: experience of two Academic Hospitals.
Article in La Radiologia medica, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inter-rater reliability of MRI Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System (NI-RADS) in the follow-up of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma.La Radiologia medica · 2026Observational
- Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Insights from Dual-Energy Computed Tomography (DECT).Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2024Review
- Imaging of human papilloma virus (HPV) related oropharynx tumour: what we know to date.Infectious agents and cancer · 2023Review
- Role of Texture Analysis in Oropharyngeal Carcinoma: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Cancers · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the quality of the reports of loco-regional staging computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in head and neck (H&N) cancer.
methodsConsecutive reports of staging CT and MRI of all H&N cancer cases from 2018 to 2020 were collected. We created lists of quality indicators for tumor (T) for each district and for node (N). We marked these as 0 or 1 in the report calculating a report score (RS) and a maximum sum (MS) of each list. Two radiologists and two otolaryngologists in consensus classified reports as low quality (LQ) if the RS fell in the percentage range 0-59% of MS and as high quality (HQ) if it fell in the range 60-100%, annotating technique and district. We evaluated the distribution of reports in these categories.
resultsTwo hundred thirty-seven reports (97 CT and 140 MRI) of 95 oral cavity, 52 laryngeal, 47 oropharyngeal, 19 hypo-pharyngeal, 14 parotid, and 10 nasopharyngeal cancers were included. Sixty-six percent of all the reports were LQ for T, 66% out of all the MRI reports, and 65% out of all CT reports were LQ. Eight-five percent of reports were HQ for N, 85% out of all the MRI reports, and 82% out of all CT reports were HQ. Reports of oral cavity, oro-nasopharynx, and parotid were LQ, respectively, in 76%, 73%, 100% and 92 out of cases.
conclusionReports of staging CT/MRI in H&N cancer were LQ for T description and HQ for N description.
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.