Accuracy of Plain Digital Radiography for the Detection of Gastrointestinal Masses in Dogs and Cats.

Keaton Cortez, Agustina Anson, Leslie Schwarz, Nathan Biedak, Tatiana Noel, Adam South

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Keaton CortezClinical Sciences Department, Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, Tufts University, North Grafton, MA 01536, USA.

Agustina AnsonClinical Sciences Department, Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, Tufts University, North Grafton, MA 01536, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3834-2324

Leslie SchwarzClinical Sciences Department, Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, Tufts University, North Grafton, MA 01536, USA.

Nathan BiedakClinical Sciences Department, Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, Tufts University, North Grafton, MA 01536, USA.

Tatiana NoelClinical Sciences Department, Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, Tufts University, North Grafton, MA 01536, USA.

Adam SouthClinical Sciences Department, Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, Tufts University, North Grafton, MA 01536, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Abdominal radiography is commonly used as an initial diagnostic tool in dogs and cats with gastrointestinal (GI) signs. Historically, abdominal radiographs were considered unreliable for detecting GI masses, with detection rates below 50%. The purpose of this retrospective, case-control study was to determine the accuracy of abdominal radiographs in identifying the presence and location of GI masses and to assess the influence of the reviewer experience. Radiographs from 114 dogs and 111 cats were reviewed by two board-certified radiologists, one first year radiology resident, and one rotating intern. Patients were categorized into three groups: animals with a GI mass greater than 2 cm (dogs

Indexed as

catsdogsintestinesneoplasiaradiographsstomach

Identifiers

PMID41594481

DOI10.3390/ani16020292

PMCPMC12837622

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.