ArticleCanadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology2019
Concordance Rate between Clinicians and Watson for Oncology among Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer: Early, Real-World Experience in Korea.
Article in Canadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Leveraging artificial intelligence to support surgical oncology multidisciplinary team decision-making: a systematic review.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Pooled it
- A meta-analysis of Watson for Oncology in clinical application.Scientific reports · 2021Pooled it
- Alignment Between Treatment Decision and Treatment Administration for Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Upper Aerodigestive Tract Before, During, and After the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Retrospective Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Digital decision support for structural improvement of melanoma tumor boards: using standard cases to optimize workflow.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2024Article
- The Fidelity of Artificial Intelligence to Multidisciplinary Tumor Board Recommendations for Patients with Gastric Cancer: A Retrospective Study.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2024Article
- Validation and implementation of a mobile app decision support system for prostate cancer to improve quality of tumor boards.PLOS digital health · 2023Article
- Use and accuracy of decision support systems using artificial intelligence for tumor diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Identifying cancer-associated leukocyte profiles using high-resolution flow cytometry screening and machine learning.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- Artificial intelligence in clinical decision support systems for oncology.International journal of medical sciences · 2023Review
- Article
- Can artificial intelligence overtake human intelligence on the bumpy road towards glioma therapy?Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2021Review
- Early experience with Watson for Oncology: a clinical decision-support system for prostate cancer treatment recommendations.World journal of urology · 2021Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Driven Oncology Clinical Decision Support System for Multidisciplinary Teams.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Hematology: Current Challenges and Opportunities.Current hematologic malignancy reports · 2020Review
- When Predictive Models Collide.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2020Article
- Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning: A New Disruptive Force in Orthopaedics.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2020Review
- Concordance Between Watson for Oncology and a Multidisciplinary Clinical Decision-Making Team for Gastric Cancer and the Prognostic Implications: Retrospective Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Concordance Between Watson for Oncology and Multidisciplinary Teams in Colorectal Cancer: Prognostic Implications and Predicting Concordance.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Article
- Use of Natural Language Processing to Extract Clinical Cancer Phenotypes from Electronic Medical Records.Cancer research · 2019Review
- Artificial Intelligence in the Management of Glioma: Era of Personalized Medicine.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Backgrounds/Aims: Watson for Oncology (WFO) is a cognitive technology that processes medical information by analyzing the latest evidence and guidelines. However, studies of the concordance rate between WFO and clinicians for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) are lacking. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 65 patients with AGC who consulted WFO and the Gachon Gil Medical Center multidisciplinary team (GMDT) in 2016 and 2017. The recommendations of WFO were compared with the opinions of the GMDT. WFO provided three treatment options: recommended (first treatment option), for consideration (second treatment option), and not recommended. Results: In total, 65 patients (mean age 61.0 years; 44 males and 21 females) were included in the study. The concordance rate between WFO and the GMDT was 41.5% (27/65) at the recommended level and 87.7% (57/65) at the for consideration level. The main causes of discordance between WFO and the GMDT were as follows. First, WFO did not consider the medical history. Second, WFO recommended the use of agents that are considered outdated in Korea. Third, some patients wanted to be involved in a clinical trial. Fourth, some patients refused to use the biologic agents recommended by WFO for financial reasons as they were not covered by medical insurance. Conclusions: The concordance rate at the recommended level was relatively low but was higher at the for consideration level. Discordances arose mainly from the different medical circumstances at the Gachon Gil Medical Center (GMC) and the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), the main WFO consulting center. The utility of WFO as a tool for supporting clinical decision making could be further improved by incorporating regional guidelines.
Indexed as
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.