ReviewCardiovascular and interventional radiology2026
Retrospective Clinical Studies in Interventional Oncology: Relevance and Challenges.
Review in Cardiovascular and interventional radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Building the Evidence Base for Pediatric Interventional Oncology Through Multi-institutional Retrospective Collaboration: A Call to Action.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2026Article
- Circulating IGF2BP3 enables risk stratification and predicts treatment response in Ewing sarcoma.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Clinical Trials in Interventional Oncology: A Field Growing Up Fast.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2026Article
- A shared decision-making approach to individualized exercise management enhances glycemic control, self-care behaviors, and quality of life in type 2 diabetes: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Retrospective clinical studies are critical in interventional oncology (IO), offering insights by analyzing existing data. They are cost-effective, time-efficient, and invaluable for exploring real-world treatment trends, long-term effects, and rare diseases. Retrospective studies provide critical support for hypothesis generation, post-marketing surveillance, and addressing ethically or logistically challenging questions unsuitable for prospective or randomized controlled trials (RCTs). To maximize their utility, retrospective studies must ensure robust data quality, clear objectives, advanced statistical methods, and transparency. Despite challenges like biases and limited causal inference, their ability to complement RCTs and other types of prospective trials help to close crucial gaps in evidence generation, which makes them indispensable for research in the rapidly evolving field of interventional oncology.
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.