Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 529

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Bosniak Classification of Cystic Renal Masses, Version 2019: An Update Proposal and Needs Assessment

Open access
Silverman, Stuart G., Pedrosa, Ivan, Ellis, James H., Hindman, Nicole M., Schieda, Nicola, Smith, Andrew D., Remer, Erick M., Shinagare, Atul B., Curci, Nicole E., Raman, Steven S., Wells, Shane A., Kaffenberger, Samuel D., Wang, Zhen J., Chandarana, Hersh, Davenport, Matthew S.·2019·Radiology

Abstract

Cystic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is almost certainly overdiagnosed and overtreated. Efforts to diagnose and treat RCC at a curable stage result in many benign neoplasms and indolent cancers being resected without clear benefit. This is especially true for cystic masses, which compared with solid masses are more likely to be benign and, when malignant, less aggressive. For more than 30 years, the Bosniak classification has been used to stratify the risk of malignancy in cystic renal masses. Although it is widely used and still effective, the classification does not formally incorporate masses identified at MRI or US or masses that are incompletely characterized but are highly likely to be benign, and it is affected by interreader variability and variable reported malignancy rates. The Bosniak classification system cannot fully differentiate aggressive from indolent cancers and results in many benign masses being resected. This proposed update to the Bosniak classification addresses some of these shortcomings. The primary modifications incorporate MRI, establish definitions for previously vague imaging terms, and enable a greater proportion of masses to enter lower-risk classes. Although the update will require validation, it aims to expand the number of cystic masses to which the Bosniak classification can be applied while improving its precision and accuracy for the likelihood of cancer in each class.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1148/radiol.2019182646

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 529

Metadata

Authors
Silverman, S. G., Pedrosa, I., Ellis, J. H., Hindman, N. M., Schieda, N., Smith, A. D., Remer, E. M., Shinagare, A. B., Curci, N. E., Raman, S. S., Wells, S. A., Kaffenberger, S. D., Wang, Z. J., Chandarana, H., & Davenport, M. S.
Venue
Radiology
Published
2019-08
Volume
292
Issue
2
Pages
475-488
ISSN
  • 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-1315
OpenAlex
W2950537929
Cited by
529
References
1
FWCI
34.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Bosniak Classification of Cystic Renal Masses, Version 2019: An Update Proposal and Needs Assessment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.2019182646
The paper
Silverman, S. G., Pedrosa, I., Ellis, J. H., Hindman, N. M., Schieda, N., Smith, A. D., Remer, E. M., Shinagare, A. B., Curci, N. E., Raman, S. S., Wells, S. A., Kaffenberger, S. D., Wang, Z. J., Chandarana, H., & Davenport, M. S. (2019). Bosniak Classification of Cystic Renal Masses, Version 2019: An Update Proposal and Needs Assessment. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019182646

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.