ArticlePloS one
Novel and Practical Scoring Systems for the Diagnosis of Thyroid Nodules.
Article in PloS one. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Molecular Variants and Their Risks for Malignancy in Cytologically Indeterminate Thyroid Nodules.Thyroid : official journal of the American Thyroid Association · 2019Pooled it
- A Comprehensive Exploration of Thyroid Nodules Diagnosis, Epidemiology and Pathophysiology with Emphasis on the Role of Traditional Chinese Medicine Treatment.International journal of general medicine · 2026Review
- BRAFCancer medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe clinical management of patients with thyroid nodules that are biopsied by fine-needle aspiration cytology and yield indeterminate results remains unsettled. The BRAF V600E mutation has dubious diagnostic value due to its low sensitivity. Novel strategies are urgently needed to distinguish thyroid malignancies from thyroid nodules.
designThis prospective study included 504 thyroid nodules diagnosed by ultrasonography from 468 patients, and fine-needle aspiration cytology was performed under ultrasound guidance. Cytology and molecular analysis, including BRAF V600E, RET/PTC1 and RET/PTC3, were conducted simultaneously. The cytology, ultrasonography results, and mutational status were gathered and analyzed together. Predictive scoring systems were designed using a combination of diagnostic parameters for ultrasonography, cytology and genetic analysis. The utility of the scoring systems was analyzed and compared to detection using the individual methods alone or combined.
resultThe sensitivity of scoring systema (ultrasonography, cytology, BRAF V600E, RET/PTC) was nearly identical to that of scoring systemb (ultrasonography, cytology, BRAF V600E); these were 91.0% and 90.2%, respectively. These sensitivities were significantly higher than those obtained using FNAC, genetic analysis and US alone or combined; their sensitivities were 63.9%, 70.7% and 87.2%, respectively. Scoring systemc (ultrasonography, cytology) was slightly inferior to the former two scoring systems but still had relatively high sensitivity and specificity (80.5% and 95.1%, respectively), which were significantly superior to those of single cytology, ultrasonography or genetic analysis. In nodules with uncertainty cytology, scoring systema, scoring systemb and scoring systemc could elevate the malignancy detection rates to 69.7%, 69.7% and 63.6%, respectively.
conclusionThese three scoring systems were quick for clinicians to master and could provide quantified information to predict the probability of malignant nodules. Scoring systemb is recommended for improving the detection rate among nodules of uncertain cytology.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.