SynthesisThe British journal of radiology2023
The diagnostic value of quantitative assessment of MR neurography in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in The British journal of radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of Imaging in Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy: A Systematic Review.European journal of neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Quantitative Neuromuscular MRI in CIDP Patients: Interest of a Multiparametric Approach.European journal of neurology · 2026Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of quantitative magnetic resonance neurography (MRN) in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP). We also compared various MRN parameters and determined the best performing one.
methodsThrough literature searches in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Ovid MEDLINE and ClinicalTtrials.gov until March 1, 2023, we selected studies with the diagnostic performance of MRN in CIDP patients. The pooled estimated sensitivity and specificity of quantitative MRN parameters were determined by a bivariate random-effects model. Subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate the proper quantitative parameters and nerve sites.
resultsA total of 14 quantitative MRN studies with 23 results gave a pooled sensitivity of 0.73 (95% CI 0.66-0.79) and a pooled specificity of 0.89 (95% CI 0.84-0.92). The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.89 (95%CI 0.86-0.92). Subgroup analysis of quantitative parameters showed the fractional anisotropy (FA) with the highest sensitivity of 0.85 (95% CI 0.77-0.90) and cross-sectional area (CSA) with the highest specificity of 0.95 (95% CI 0.85-0.99). The pooled correlation coefficient for interobserver agreements was 0.90 (95%CI 0.82-0.95).
conclusionQuantitative MRN has considerable diagnostic value in CIDP patients with accuracy and reliability. FA and CSA can be promising parameters in the future diagnosis of CIDP patients. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is the first meta-analysis of quantitative MRN in the diagnosis of CIDP.We have selected reliable parameters with cut-off value and provided new insights for subsequent diagnosis of CIDP.
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.