Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39272869›Full record

ReviewCancers2024

Head-to-Head Comparison of [

Natale Quartuccio, Sabina Pulizzi, Domenico Michele Modica, Stefania Nicolosi, Dante D'Oppido, Antonino Maria Moreci, Salvatore Ialuna

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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Predictive Value of [Journal of clinical medicine · 2025
    Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Natale QuartuccioDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Ospedali Riuniti Villa Sofia-Cervello, 90146 Palermo, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9845-1384
Sabina PulizziDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Ospedali Riuniti Villa Sofia-Cervello, 90146 Palermo, Italy.
Domenico Michele ModicaU.O.C. Otolaryngology, Ospedali Riuniti Villa Sofia-Cervello, 90146 Palermo, Italy.
Stefania NicolosiDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Ospedali Riuniti Villa Sofia-Cervello, 90146 Palermo, Italy.
Dante D'OppidoDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Ospedali Riuniti Villa Sofia-Cervello, 90146 Palermo, Italy.
Antonino Maria MoreciDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Ospedali Riuniti Villa Sofia-Cervello, 90146 Palermo, Italy.
Salvatore IalunaDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Ospedali Riuniti Villa Sofia-Cervello, 90146 Palermo, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6405-1830

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis meta-analysis compared the diagnostic performance of [

methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted in the PubMed/MEDLINE and CENTRAL databases to find studies with at least 20 patients with NPC undergoing both [

resultsFive studies, including 1908 patients (six patient groups), were included. PET imaging had higher sensitivity [93.3% (95% CI: 91.3-94.9%); I

conclusionsThis meta-analysis suggests that [

Indexed as

[18F]FDGMRInasopharyngeal carcinomaPET/CT

Identifiers

PMID39272869
PMCPMC11394460

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.