Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36220326›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Understanding the use of evidence in the WHO Classification of Tumours: a protocol for an evidence gap map of the classification of tumours of the lung.

Javier Del Aguila Mejía, Subasri Armon, Fiona Campbell, Richard Colling, Magdalena Chechlinska, Magdalena Kowalewska, Marina Pollán, Stefan Holdenrieder, Puay Hoon Tan, Ian Cree and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Digital Tools to Support the Systematic Review Process: An Introduction.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025
    Review
  6. 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

11 authors.

Javier Del Aguila MejíaWHO/IARC Classification of Tumours Programme, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.ORCID 0000-0001-5697-5980
Subasri ArmonWHO/IARC Classification of Tumours Programme, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Fiona CampbellEvidence Synthesis Group, Population Health Sciences Institute Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4141-8863
Richard CollingDepartment of Cellular Pathology, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Magdalena ChechlinskaDepartment of Cancer Biology, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Warszawa, Poland.
Magdalena KowalewskaDepartment of Cancer Biology, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Warszawa, Poland.
Marina PollánCentro Nacional de Epidemiología, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-4328-1565
Stefan HoldenriederInstitute of Laboratory Medicine, Munich Biomarker Research Center, Deutsches Herzzentrum München, Munchen, Germany.
Puay Hoon TanDivision of Pathology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Ian CreeWHO/IARC Classification of Tumours Programme, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Blanca Iciar Indave RuizWHO/IARC Classification of Tumours Programme, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France iciarindave@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-0259-4781

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere are gaps in the evidence base of tumour classification despite being essential for cancer diagnosis, treatment and patient care. The WHO in charge of the production of an updated international classification, the WHO Classification of Tumours (WCT), aims to adapt evidence gap map (EGM) methodology to inform future editions of the WCT, by providing a visual summary of the existing evidence. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Bibliographical references used in the WCT fifth edition of Tumours of the Lung (Thoracic Tumours volume) will be used as search results of a literature search. A descriptive analysis of the cited evidence for tumour types and descriptors will be drafted and plotted in EPPI-Reviewer to develop a visual evidence map. The resulting EGM will reflect the number of cited studies in the size of the spheres, and the level of evidence by applying a four-colour code (red=low level evidence, orange=moderate level, green=high level and blue=unclassifiable). Overview of the findings will be provided in narrative form and a report will discuss the overall stage of cited research in the WCT and will include analysis of gaps, under-researched categories of tumour descriptors and pockets of low-level evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics approval will be required as this is a study of previously published material. Findings of the EGM will be published and used to guide editors, stakeholders and researchers for future research planning and related decision-making, especially for the development of future editions of the WCT. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022302327.

Indexed as

Lung NeoplasmsThoracic NeoplasmsHumansWorld Health OrganizationONCOLOGYPATHOLOGYRespiratory tract tumours

Identifiers

PMID36220326
PMCPMC9558796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.