ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2022
Narrative Review of Classification Systems Describing Laryngeal Vascularity Using Advanced Endoscopic Imaging.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perpendicular Vascular Changes in NBI-CE of Laryngeal Lesions: Diagnostic Accuracy, Reproducibility, and Common Pitfalls.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Clinical significance of type IV vascularization of laryngeal lesions according to the Ni classification.Frontiers in oncology · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Endoscopic methods are critical in the early diagnosis of mucosal lesions of the head and neck. In recent years, new examination methods and classification systems have been developed and introduced into clinical practice. All of these new techniques target the notion of optical biopsy, which tries to assess the nature of the lesion before histology examination. Many methods suffer from interpretation issues due to subjective interpretation of the findings. Therefore, multiple classification systems have been developed to assist the proper interpretation of mucosal findings and reduce the error rate. They provide various perspectives on the assessment and interpretation of mucosa changes. This article provides a comprehensive and critical view of the available classification systems as well as their advantages and disadvantages.
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.