ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2025
A
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to establish a clinical nomogram model based on a radiomics signatures derived from
methodsA retrospective analysis included 332 cases from July 2011 to July 2021 at The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, with PET/CT assessing radiomics features and clinicopathological features. Univariate Cox regression, the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) Cox, and multivariable Cox regression identified recurrence-related radiomics features. We used a weighted radiomics score (Rad-score) and independent risk factors to construct a nomogram. Evaluation involved time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA).
resultsThe nomogram, incorporating Rad-score, pN, and pT demonstrated robust predictive ability for DFS in stage II/III colorectal adenocarcinoma. Training cohort areas under the curve (AUCs) were 0.78, 0.80, and 0.86 at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively, and validation cohort AUCs were 0.79, 0.75, and 0.73. DCA and calibration curves affirmed the nomogram's clinical relevance.
conclusionThe
Indexed as
Identifiers
39096393What 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.