It's not all in the numbers.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Quality and utility of [Annals of nuclear medicine · 2021
   Article
2. Iodine-123-metaiodobenzylguanidine cardiac SPECT imaging in the qualification of heart failure patients for ICD implantation.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2019
   Article
3. Neurocardiac imaging has a proven value in patient management.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2017
   Article
4. Current Clinical Applications and Next Steps for Cardiac Innervation Imaging.Current cardiology reports · 2017
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Quantitative iodine-123-metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) SPECT imaging in heart failure with left ventricular systolic dysfunction: Development and validation of automated procedures in conjunction with technetium-99m tetrofosmin myocardial perfusion SPECT.2016

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.