SynthesisRadiation oncology (London, England)2024
The role of
Synthesis in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Machine Learning-Driven radiomics on 18 F-FDG PET for glioma diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025Pooled it
- A narrative review: key evidence from meta-analyses in nuclear medicine.Annals of nuclear medicine · 2026Review
- Diagnostic Performance ofNPJ breast cancer · 2026Article
- Monitoring Pharmacological Treatment of Breast Cancer with MRI.Current issues in molecular biology · 2025Review
- Longitudinal MRI-Driven Multi-Modality Approach for Predicting Pathological Complete Response and B Cell Infiltration in Breast Cancer.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimThe present study aimed to evaluate the use of
methodsWe searched numerous databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Science Direct, using curated keywords. The variance of each study was determined using the binomial distribution, and STATA version 14 was used to analyze the data by performing random-effect models. Additionally, we calculated study heterogeneity using the chi-squared test and I
resultsThe current investigation analyzed 239 patients from six published studies. The pooled estimated sensitivity and specificity of
conclusionsBased on our findings, the combined form of
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.