Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39302525›Full record

SynthesisJapanese journal of radiology2025

Applicability and performance of

K J Das, J K Meena, D Kumar

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Japanese journal of radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

3 authors.

K J DasDept. of Nuclear Medicine, National Cancer Institute (NCI-AIIMS), All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, India.
J K MeenaDept. of Preventive Oncology, National Cancer Institute (NCI-AIIMS), All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, India. drmeenajk@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4912-9609
D KumarDept. of Nuclear Medicine, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College & Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeScreening tests are the cornerstone for early detection and optimal management of cancers. Most of the present cancer-screening tests are intrusive, time-consuming, and specifically target a particular anatomical site or cancer type. Only a few studies have reported the objective measures of MATERIALS AND

methodsThe systematic review and meta-analysis were performed following PRISMA guidelines. Literature searches in PubMed, Scopus, and Embase were conducted using relevant MeSH terms and keywords, for articles published in the last 2 decades (2000-2022). Pooled estimates of diagnostic test accuracy-including sensitivity, specificity, positive-likelihood ratio, negative-likelihood ratio, and hierarchical summary ROC (HSROC) curve were generated using bivariate random-effects meta-analysis.

resultsSeventeen studies were included in the systematic review and 13 studies were deemed eligible for meta-analysis. The mean estimates of pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive-likelihood ratio, negative-likelihood ratio, and Odds ratio using

conclusionThis study demonstrates that currently

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerFluorodeoxyglucose F18NeoplasmsPositron-Emission TomographyRadiopharmaceuticalsWhole Body ImagingHumansSensitivity and SpecificityFluorodeoxyglucose F18Radiopharmaceuticals18F-FDG PETCancer preventionEarly detectionPET scanScreening

Identifiers

PMID39302525

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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 Socratic graph.