Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41503001›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of nuclear medicine2025

Diagnostic Performance of [

Dapeng Shen, Lexuan Chen, Pengyuan Su, Peng Chen, Wei Zeng, Shen Chen, Jiemiao Shen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Dapeng ShenThe Second Clinical Medical College, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, People's Republic of China.
Lexuan ChenThe Second Clinical Medical College, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, People's Republic of China.
Pengyuan SuThe Second Clinical Medical College, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, People's Republic of China.
Peng ChenThe Second Clinical Medical College, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, People's Republic of China.
Wei ZengSchool of Pediatrics, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, People's Republic of China.
Shen ChenSchool of Nursing, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, People's Republic of China.
Jiemiao ShenSchool of Nursing, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, People's Republic of China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) ranks among the leading causes of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Accurate detection of lymph node metastases plays a crucial role in determining disease stage and guiding treatment decisions. Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) and 18F-FDG PET/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are advanced imaging modalities widely used in clinical practice. The study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of [ Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases to identify relevant studies published up to February 2025. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies evaluating the diagnostic performance of [ Results: This meta-analysis incorporated 24 studies with a cumulative total of 3,369 patients. The findings revealed that [ Conclusions: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that [

Indexed as

[ 18 F]FDG PET/CT[ 18 F]FDG PET/MRIcolorectal cancerlymph node metastasesmeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID41503001
PMCPMC12774531

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.