The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Prophylactic central neck dissection for papillary thyroid cancer
Open accessAbstract
Background: Prophylactic central neck dissection (CND) for papillary thyroid cancer (PTC) remains controversial. The aim of this study was to examine whether prophylactic CND for PTC affected long-term survival and locoregional control. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent total thyroidectomy (TT) with bilateral prophylactic CND. They were compared with patients who had TT without CND. Personalized adjuvant radioiodine treatment was used in both groups. Primary outcomes were overall and disease-specific survival, and locoregional control. Secondary outcomes were number of patients with negative serum thyroglobulin levels, and morbidity. Results: Of 640 patients with PTC included in this study, 282 (treated in 1993–1997) had TT without CND and 358 (treated in 1998–2002) underwent TT with CND. The 10-year disease-specific survival rate for patients who had TT without CND was 92·5 per cent compared with 98·0 per cent in patients with CND (P = 0·034), and the locoregional control rate was 87·6 and 94·5 per cent respectively (P = 0·003). In multivariable analysis, extrathyroidal extension was an independent predictive factor for locoregional recurrence (odds ratio 12·47, 95 per cent confidence interval 6·74 to 23·06; P < 0·001), whereas CND was an independent predictive factor for improved locoregional control at 10 years after surgery (odds ratio 0·21, 0·11 to 0·41; P < 0·001). No differences were seen in the rates of permanent hypoparathyroidism or recurrent laryngeal nerve injury between the groups. Conclusion: Bilateral prophylactic CND for staging of the neck in PTC, followed by personalized adjuvant radioiodine treatment, improved both 10-year disease-specific survival and locoregional control, without increasing the risk of permanent morbidity. Registration number: NCT01510002 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Cooper, D. S., Doherty, G. M., Haugen, B. R., Kloos, R. T., Lee, S. L., Mandel, S. J., Mazzaferri, E. L., McIver, B., Pacini, F., Schlumberger, M., et al. (2009) · Thyroid · doi:10.1089/thy.2009.0110 · Cited by 6,707
The Importance of Surgeon Experience for Clinical and Economic Outcomes From Thyroidectomy
Sosa, J. A., Bowman, H. M., Tielsch, J. M., Powe, N. R., Gordon, T. A., & Udelsman, R. (1998) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/00000658-199809000-00005 · Cited by 1,118
Cited by
Haugen, B. R., Alexander, E. K., Bible, K. C., Doherty, G. M., Mandel, S. J., Nikiforov, Y. E., Pacini, F., Randolph, G. W., Sawka, A. M., Schlumberger, M., et al. (2016) · Thyroid® · doi:10.1089/thy.2015.0020 · Cited by 16,535
Guidelines for the management of thyroid cancer
Perros, P., Boelaert, K., Colley, S., Evans, C., Evans, R. M., Gerrard BA, G., Gilbert, J., Harrison, B., Johnson, S. J., Giles, T. E., et al. (2014) · Clinical Endocrinology · doi:10.1111/cen.12515 · Cited by 1,372
Metadata
- Authors
- Barczyński, M., Konturek, A., Stopa, M., & Nowak, W.
- Venue
- Journal of British Surgery
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2013-01-08
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 410-418
- ISSN
- 0007-1323 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2168
- OpenAlex
- W2114275847
- Cited by
- 281
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 12.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prophylactic central neck dissection for papillary thyroid cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/bjs.8985
- The paper
- Barczyński, M., Konturek, A., Stopa, M., & Nowak, W. (2013). Prophylactic central neck dissection for papillary thyroid cancer. Journal of British Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.8985
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.