ReviewBiomedicines2022
Review in Biomedicines, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Manual and Fully Automated Chemotaxis-Based Cancer Screening Yield Equivalent Performance: A Nine-Month Real-World, Side-by-Side Study of the N-NOSE Workflow.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Olfactory Science and Technology in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: From Invertebrate Models to Artificial Intelligence.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Recent Exploration of Solid Cancer Biomarkers Hidden Within Urine or Blood Exosomes That Provide Fundamental Information for Future Cancer Diagnostics.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Advancing Veterinary Oncology: Next-Generation Diagnostics for Early Cancer Detection and Clinical Implementation.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Review
- Non-Invasive Detection of Tumors by Volatile Organic Compounds in Urine.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Article
- The chemotactic response of Caenorhabditis elegans represents a promising tool for the early detection of cancer.Discover oncology · 2024Article
- N-NOSE Proves Effective for Early Cancer Detection: Real-World Data from Third-Party Medical Institutions.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- Worm-Based Diagnosis Combining Microfluidics toward Early Cancer Screening.Micromachines · 2024Review
- Review
- State-of-the-Art Cancer Biology, Biodiagnostics and Therapeutics in Japan.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- Pancreatic Cancer and Detection Methods.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Regular cancer screening is critical for early cancer detection. Cancer screening tends to be burdensome, invasive, and expensive, especially for a comprehensive multi-organ check. Improving the rate and effectiveness of routine cancer screenings remain a challenge in health care. Multi-cancer early detection (MCED) is an exciting concept and a potentially effective solution for addressing current issues with routine cancer screening. In recent years, several technologies have matured for MCED, such as identifying cell-free tumor DNA in blood or using organisms such as
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.