2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2011.11.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

CT-scan is a valuable tool to detect mandibular involvement in oral cancer patients

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
34
0
2

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 59 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
3
34
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Handschel et al indicated that the sensitivity and specificity of CT scan in detecting bone involvement of oral squamous cell carcinomas were 82.6%, 86.9% and Positive predictive value and Negative predictive value were 82.6%, 86.9% respectively. (21) There were an acceptable agreement between the result of research of Handschel et al (21) and the present study. In our study and study of Handschel et al (21) The sensitivity was higher than specificity and the Positive predictive value was higher than the negative predictive value too.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Handschel et al indicated that the sensitivity and specificity of CT scan in detecting bone involvement of oral squamous cell carcinomas were 82.6%, 86.9% and Positive predictive value and Negative predictive value were 82.6%, 86.9% respectively. (21) There were an acceptable agreement between the result of research of Handschel et al (21) and the present study. In our study and study of Handschel et al (21) The sensitivity was higher than specificity and the Positive predictive value was higher than the negative predictive value too.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…(21) There were an acceptable agreement between the result of research of Handschel et al (21) and the present study. In our study and study of Handschel et al (21) The sensitivity was higher than specificity and the Positive predictive value was higher than the negative predictive value too. But sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were less than in the Handschel et al (21) It is possibly due to lack of sufficient data about patient selection, the time transcurred of imaging tests and histopathological verification.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…[27][28][29][30] There are a total of 271 participants, 130 diagnosed with SCC and 141 without SCC. The technical aspects of the different imaging modalities as well as the diagnostic and validation criteria can be seen in Table 4.…”
Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From an imaging point of view, there are discrepancies in application of the tests in these studies, such as differing slice thicknesses for CT 30 and different tesla values for MRI.…”
Section: Risk Of Bias In the Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation