Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37876965›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2023

MRI for the detection of small malignant renal masses: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Wenwen Shang, Guohui Hong, Wei Li

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Wenwen ShangDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jiangsu Vocational College of Medicine, Yancheng, China.
Guohui HongDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jiangsu Vocational College of Medicine, Yancheng, China.
Wei LiDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jiangsu Vocational College of Medicine, Yancheng, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: We aimed to review the available evidence on the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging in differentiating malignant from benign small renal masses. Methods: An electronic literature search of Web of Science, MEDLINE (Ovid and PubMed), Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Google Scholar was performed to identify relevant articles up to 31 January 2023. We included studies that reported the diagnostic accuracy of using magnetic resonance imaging to differentiate small (≤4 cm) malignant from benign renal masses. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio were calculated using the bivariate model and the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic model. The study quality evaluation was performed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. Results: A total of 10 studies with 860 small renal masses (815 patients) were included in the current meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the studies for the detection of malignant masses were 0.85 (95% CI 0.79-0.90) and 0.83 (95% CI 0.67-0.92), respectively. Conclusions: MRI had a moderate diagnostic performance in differentiating small malignant renal masses from benign ones. Substantial heterogeneity was observed between studies for both sensitivity and specificity.

Indexed as

classificationdiagnosismeta-analysisMRIsmall renal mass

Identifiers

PMID37876965
PMCPMC10591109

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.