ArticleBMC medical imaging2024
The value of quantitative shear wave elastography combined with conventional ultrasound in evaluating and guiding fine needle aspiration biopsy of axillary lymph node for early breast cancer: implication for axillary surgical stage.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the value of conventional ultrasonography (US) combined with quantitative shear wave elastography (SWE) in evaluating and identifying target axillary lymph node (TALN) for fine needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) of patients with early breast cancer. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 222 patients with 223 ALNs were prospectively recruited from January 2018 to December 2021. All TALNs were evaluated by US, SWE and subsequently underwent FNAB. The diagnostic performances of US, SWE, UE
resultsThe area under the ROC curve (AUC) for diagnosing ALNs using conventional US and SWE were 0.69 and 0.66, respectively, with sensitivities of 78.00% and 65.00% and specificities of 60.98% and 66.67%. The combined method, UE
conclusionThe UE
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.