SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2026
Magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) for differentiating tumour recurrence from radiation necrosis in treated intra-axial brain tumours.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advances in the prevention and treatment of radiation-induced brain necrosis: a narrative review.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (diagnostic). The objectives are as follows: The primary objective of this review is to determine the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) for detecting tumour recurrence or progression in people with primary or secondary intra-axial brain tumours who have previously undergone radiotherapy or radiosurgery and who present with new or enlarging contrast-enhancing lesions suggestive of recurrence. Secondary objectives The secondary objective of this review is to explore potential sources of heterogeneity in the diagnostic performance of MRS and to investigate the existence of clinically meaningful diagnostic cut-offs or thresholds. In this context, heterogeneity refers to differences between studies, such as technical parameters of the test (e.g. MRS acquistion technique), participants (e.g. primary tumour or metastases), types of treatment modalities, and variations in reference standard (e.g. diagnostic thresholds) that may influence how well the test performs.
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.