In Vivo Optical Coherence Tomography for the Detection, Subtyping, and Margin Assessment of Facial Basal Cell Carcinoma: A Comparative Study with Histopathology.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Surgical Outcomes of Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer Managed with Systematic Preoperative Reflectance Confocal Microscopy-Guided Margin Assessment: A Retrospective Cohort Study Comparing Wide Local Excision and Mohs Micrographic Surgery.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
   Article
2. Polarisation-Sensitive Optical Coherence Tomography for Surgical Margin Evaluation and Diagnosis of Excised Canine Cutaneous and Subcutaneous Tumours.Veterinary and comparative oncology · 2026
   Article
3. Feasibility of confocal laser endomicroscopy as an optical biopsy method for SCC on the auricle : an exploratory study.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2026
   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

4 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as