ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2022
The diagnostic value of diffusion kurtosis imaging in Parkinson's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- The burden of Parkinson's disease, 1990-2021: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease study 2021.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2025Article
- Article
- Functional connectivity in autism spectrum disorder evaluated using rs-fMRI and DKI.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Under the background that diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI) has become a research hotspot of central nervous system diseases, there are no studies with large sample size evaluating the value of DKI in diagnosing Parkinson's disease (PD). Moreover, the diagnostic efficacy of DKI in PD is not consistent. Therefore, the main purpose of this study is to use the method of meta-analysis, to summarize and evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of DKI in the identification of PD, and to explore the value of its clinical application. Methods: We use PICOS principles for project design. The included patients were PD patients, and the control group were healthy volunteers. We hope to use DKI to make a differential diagnosis between the two, and this study is a diagnostic test. We performed a literature search of English (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, etc.) and Chinese (China knowledge Network, Wanfang Data Knowledge Service platform, China Science and Technology Journal Database, China Biomedical Literature Service system) databases for related literatures on the efficacy of DKI in the differential diagnosis of PD published before March 29, 2022. We used Revman 5.3 software to assess the quality of the literature, Meta-Disc 1.4 software for summarizing sensitivity (Sen), specificity (Spe), diagnostic odds ratios, and heterogeneity tests, and for subgrouping, and Stata 16.0 software for publication bias analysis. Results: Fourteen articles were included through the literature search. The 14 studies included 535 patients with PD and 486 patients without PD. Most of the included literature had good clinical applicability and relatively low risk. By merging statistics, the results obtained were as follows: Sen =0.78 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.74-0.81], Spe =0.83 (95% CI: 0.79-0.86), and the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was 0.8870. Discussion: The results of the meta-analysis showed that magnetic resonance DKI has comparable diagnostic accuracy in the diagnosis of PD. However, this study also has limitations, and the use of different diagnostic gold standards in the included studies may have some impact on the case selection in the study.
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.