ReviewDiagnostic and prognostic research2026
Raman spectroscopy as a diagnostic tool for glioma: protocol for a systematic review.
Review in Diagnostic and prognostic research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGlioma is the most common primary brain tumor, demanding prompt and accurate diagnosis to guide therapy decisions. Conventional diagnostic methods such as histopathology and neuroimaging are limited by their invasiveness, subjectivity, or lack of intraoperative precision. Raman spectroscopy is an emerging, label-free optical technique that detects the unique molecular "fingerprint" of tissues, enabling real-time differentiation between tumor-infiltrated and normal brains based on their biochemical composition. Despite a growing body of experimental and translational studies, a comprehensive synthesis of Raman spectroscopy's clinical applicability in detecting glioma micro-infiltration is lacking.
methodsWe will search four electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science) for English-language studies published from 2015 to 2025. Eligible studies may use in vivo Raman (subjects with suspected or histologically confirmed glioma), ex vivo Raman (freshly excised human tissue), or in vitro analysis on archived human samples, provided the tissue originated from confirmed glioma cases. Primary outcomes will be diagnostic accuracy measures, including but not limited to sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, area under de curve (AUC), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and positive/negative likelihood ratios (LR+/LR−). Secondary outcomes include its role in intraoperative margin assessment, diagnostic time, and machine learning-assisted classification. Data traction and risk of bias assessment will be conducted independently by two reviewers. Meta-analyses will be performed using specific statistics where applicable. If a meta-analysis is not feasible, a structured narrative synthesis will be employed, following the SWiM (Synthesis Without Meta-analysis) guidelines. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) will be applied to evaluate the certainty of evidence. The review will follow Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. DISCUSSION: This review will synthesize the emerging diagnostic landscape of Raman spectroscopy for glioma, positioning it as a transformative adjunct to traditional histopathology and intraoperative decision-making. Our findings will pave the way for a translational roadmap to integrate real-time Raman spectroscopy into neurosurgical workflows with machine learning support. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD420251025922.
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.