Comparison of procedural anxiety and pain associated with conventional transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy to magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy: a prospective cohort trial.

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 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Comprehensive Evaluation of Targeted and Perilesional Biopsy in Biopsy-Naïve Patients With Prostate Positive Magnetic Resonance Imaging: PERI-PRO Noninferiority Randomized Controlled Trial.The Journal of urology · 2026
   Trial
2. Residents and Consultants Have Equal Outcomes When Performing Transrectal Fusion Biopsies: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024
   Trial

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as