SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2022
Diagnostic performance of the Bosniak classification, version 2019 for cystic renal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Defining new radiological patterns to improve classification of Bosniak III and IV cystic renal masses.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- CEUS Bosniak Classification-Time for Differentiation and Change in Renal Cyst Surveillance.Cancers · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To systematically assess the diagnostic performance of the Bosniak classification, version 2019 for risk stratification of cystic renal masses. Methods: We conducted an electronic literature search on Web of Science, MEDLINE (Ovid and PubMed), Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Google Scholar to identify relevant articles between June 1, 2019 and March 31, 2022 that used the Bosniak classification, version 2019 for risk stratification of cystic renal masses. Summary estimates of sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR-), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were pooled with the bivariate model and hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) model. The quality of the included studies was assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. Results: A total of eight studies comprising 720 patients were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.85 (95% CI 0.79-0.90) and 0.68 (95% CI 0.58-0.76), respectively, for the class III/IV threshold, with a calculated area under the HSROC curve of 0.84 (95% CI 0.81-0.87). The pooled LR+, LR-, and DOR were 2.62 (95% CI 2.0-3.44), 0.22 (95% CI 0.16-0.32), and 11.7 (95% CI 6.8-20.0), respectively. The Higgins Conclusions: The Bosniak classification, version 2019 demonstrated moderate sensitivity and specificity, and there was no difference in diagnostic accuracy between CT and MRI. Compared to version 2005, the Bosniak classification, version 2019 has the potential to significantly reduce overtreatment, but at the cost of a substantial decline in sensitivity.
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.