Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38791948›Full record

ReviewCancers2024

Endometrial Cancer: 2023 Revised FIGO Staging System and the Role of Imaging.

Manuel Menendez-Santos, Carlos Gonzalez-Baerga, Daoud Taher, Rebecca Waters, Mayur Virarkar, Priya Bhosale

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

6 authors.

Manuel Menendez-SantosDepartment of Radiology, University of Florida College of Medicine-Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL 32209, USA.
Carlos Gonzalez-BaergaDepartment of Radiology, University of Florida College of Medicine-Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL 32209, USA.
Daoud TaherDepartment of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Rebecca WatersDepartment of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Mayur VirarkarDepartment of Radiology, University of Florida College of Medicine-Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL 32209, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5825-3102
Priya BhosaleDepartment of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The FIGO endometrial cancer staging system recently released updated guidance based on clinical evidence gathered after the previous version was published in 2009. Different imaging modalities are beneficial across various stages of endometrial cancer (EC) management. Additionally, ongoing research studies are aimed at improving imaging in EC. Gynecological cancer is a crucial element in the practice of a body radiologist. With a new staging system in place, it is important to address the role of radiology in the EC diagnostic pathway. This article is a comprehensive review of the changes made to the FIGO endometrial cancer staging system and the impact of imaging in the staging of this disease.

Indexed as

endometrial cancerFIGOmolecularMRI

Identifiers

PMID38791948
PMCPMC11119523

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.