general2 papersavg year 2026quality 4/5strong evidence

Long-term follow-up

Research gap analysis derived from 2 general papers in our local library.

The gap

The studies lack long-term follow-up data to comprehensively evaluate treatment efficacy and patient outcomes in various clinical and educational contexts.

Consensus across the literature

The papers collectively establish the need for extended follow-up but leave open how such data can be collected and analyzed across different populations and interventions.

Research trend

Emerging — attention growing, methods still coalescing.

Supporting evidence — 2 representative gaps

  • ANALYSIS OF NEOADJUVANT TREATMENT OF HORMONE-DEPENDENT FORMS OF BREAST CANCER (STAGE I-III): RETROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS (2026) · doi

    The paper does not discuss long-term follow-up data or survival outcomes, focusing instead on pathomorphosis grades without addressing recurrence rates, disease-free survival, or overall survival metrics.

    Keywords: survival discuss long term follow outcomes focusing instead pathomorphosis grades without addressing recurrence rates disease
  • RESULTS OF THE STUDY OF THERAPEUTIC PATHOMORPHOSIS OF MALIGNANT EPITHELIAL TUMORS IN PATIENTS WITH LOCALLY ADVANCED RESECTABLE COLON TUMORS UNDER PREOPERATIVE CHEMORADIATION INDUCTION (2026) · doi

    Long-term follow-up data on local recurrence rates and overall survival outcomes comparing the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy group with the surgery-only group were not presented.

    Keywords: group long term follow local recurrence rates overall survival outcomes comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy surgery presented

Working on this gap? Publish with us.

Science AI Journal reviews manuscripts in under 15 minutes with 8 specialised AI reviewers calibrated on 23,000+ real peer reviews. Open access, CC BY 4.0.

Related gaps in general

Command palette

Jump anywhere, run any action.