ArticleAnnals of nuclear medicine2025
First study on the efficiency of
Article in Annals of nuclear medicine, 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.
- Can we now save the neck of OSCC T1-T2 patients? A narrative review of whether experimental techniques are on the way to clinical application.Exploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy · 2026Review
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
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the clinical efficiency of using the sentinel lymph node (SLN) imaging agent
methodsA retrospective study was conducted on 23 patients with OSCC who underwent
resultsThe SDRs of lymphoscintigraphy and SLNB were 91.3% (21/23) and 100.0% (23/23), respectively. The SDRs of lymphoscintigraphy for patients in pathological stages I/II and III/IVa were 100.0% (15/15) and 75.0% (6/8), respectively. Among the 2 patients with negative imaging results, both were stage IVa and both had SLN metastasis. The SLNs were located in levels Ib, IIa, IIb, III, and IV, accounting for 45.0% (18/40), 40.0% (16/40), 10.0% (4/40), 2.5% (1/40), and 2.5% (1/40), respectively. The median follow-up duration was 32.0 months (range: 13.0-68.0 months). During follow-up, none of the 23 patients (100.0%) showed lymph node (LN) metastasis. As a result, the sensitivity, negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were all 100.0%.
conclusionsThe application of
Indexed as
Identifiers
39729190What 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.