ArticleThe New England journal of medicine2010
Medical imaging in the 21st century--getting the best bang for the rad.
Article in The New England journal of medicine, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Appropriate Use of Cardiac Stress Testing with Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.PloS one · 2016Pooled it
- Article
- The why, who, how, and what of communicating CT radiation risks to patients and healthcare providers.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2023Review
- Article
- Validation of Prediction Rules for Computed Tomography Use in Children With Blunt Abdominal or Blunt Head Trauma: Protocol for a Prospective Multicenter Observational Cohort Study.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Extracellular Vesicles in Diagnosing Chronic Coronary Syndromes the Bumpy Road to Clinical Implementation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
- Information about radiation dose and risks in connection with radiological examinations: what patients would like to know.European radiology · 2016Article
- Appropriateness of cardiac stress test use among primary care physicians and cardiologists in the United States.International journal of cardiology · 2016Article
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Ultrasonography and Radiography in Initial Evaluation of Chest Trauma Patients.Emergency (Tehran, Iran) · 2016Article
- Application of Ultrasonography and Radiography in Detection of Hemothorax; a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Emergency (Tehran, Iran) · 2016Review
- Ultrasound and stethoscope as tools in medical education and practice: considerations for the archives.Advances in medical education and practice · 2016Article
- A Conceptual Framework for Appropriateness in Surgical Care: Reviewing Past Approaches and Looking Ahead to Patient-centered Shared Decision Making.Anesthesiology · 2015Review
- Physician decision making and trends in the use of cardiac stress testing in the United States: an analysis of repeated cross-sectional data.Annals of internal medicine · 2014Article
- Economic utility of a blood-based genomic test for the assessment of patients with symptoms suggestive of obstructive coronary artery disease.Population health management · 2014Article
- Current knowledge on tumour induction by computed tomography should be carefully used.European radiology · 2014Review
- Article
- Concordance and diagnostic accuracy of vasodilator stress cardiac MRI and 320-detector row coronary CTA.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2014Article
- Article
- Assessing the risk of second malignancies after modern radiotherapy.Nature reviews. Cancer · 2011Review
- Current and future trends in imaging informatics for oncology.Cancer journal (Sudbury, Mass.)Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20220190What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.