SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2022
Efficacy of Raman Spectroscopy in the Diagnosis of Uterine Cervical Neoplasms: A Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Label-free molecular profiling of cancer using Raman spectroscopy: from fundamentals to clinical applications.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Raman microspectroscopy for cervical cancer diagnosis: an ex-vivo cryopreserved tissue analysis.American journal of cancer research · 2026Article
- Raman Spectroscopy for Early Detection of Cervical Cancer, a Global Women's Health Issue-A Review.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Uterine cervical neoplasms is widely concerned due to its high incidence rate. Early diagnosis is extremely important for prognosis. The purpose of this article is evaluating the efficacy of Raman spectroscopy in the diagnosis of suspected uterine cervical neoplasms. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Web of science up to September 1, 2021. By analyzing the true positive (TP), false positive (FP), true negative (TN) and false negative (FN) of six included study, we evaluated the pooled and grouping sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative likelihood ratios (LR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), with 95% confidence intervals (CI), based on random effects models. The overall diagnostic accuracy of Raman spectrum was evaluated by SROC curve analysis and AUC. Results: After screening with inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of six study were included in the study. The pooled sensitivity and specificity was 0.98 (95% Cl, 0.93-0.99) and 0.95 (95% Cl, 0.89-0.98). The total PLR and NLR were 21.05 (95% CI, 8.23-53.86) and 0.03 (95% CI, 0.01-0.07), respectively. And the AUC of the SROC curve which show the overall diagnostic accuracy was 0.99 (0.98-1.00). Conclusion: Through analysis, we confirmed the role of Raman spectroscopy (RS) in the diagnosis of suspected uterine cervical tumors. Systematic Review Registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/], identifier [CRD42021284966].
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.