Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31393347›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2019

Effectiveness evaluation of computer-aided diagnosis system for the diagnosis of thyroid nodules on ultrasound: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Wan-Jun Zhao, Lin-Ru Fu, Zhi-Mian Huang, Jing-Qiang Zhu, Bu-Yun Ma

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Wan-Jun ZhaoDepartment of Thyroid & Parathyroid Surgery, West China Hospital.
Lin-Ru FuWest China School of Medicine, Sichuan University, Sichuan.
Zhi-Mian HuangBusiness College, New York University in Shanghai, Shanghai.
Jing-Qiang ZhuDepartment of Thyroid & Parathyroid Surgery, West China Hospital.
Bu-Yun MaDepartment of Ultrasonography, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Sichuan, China.
New York University · USSichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMore and more automated efficient ultrasound image analysis techniques, such as ultrasound-based computer-aided diagnosis system (CAD), were developed to obtain accurate, reproducible, and more objective diagnosis results for thyroid nodules. So far, whether the diagnostic performance of existing CAD systems can reach the diagnostic level of experienced radiologists is still controversial. The aim of the meta-analysis was to evaluate the accuracy of CAD for thyroid nodules' diagnosis by reviewing current literatures and summarizing the research status.

methodsA detailed literature search on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Libraries for articles published until December 2018 was carried out. The diagnostic performances of CAD systems vs radiologist were evaluated by meta-analysis. We determined the sensitivity and the specificity across studies, calculated positive and negative likelihood ratios and constructed summary receiver-operating characteristic (SROC) curves. Meta-analysis of studies was performed using a mixed-effect, hierarchical logistic regression model.

resultsFive studies with 536 patients and 723 thyroid nodules were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) for CAD system were 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.94), 0.79 (95% CI 0.63-0.89), 4.1 (95% CI 2.5-6.9), 0.17 (95% CI 0.09-0.32), and 25 (95% CI 15-42), respectively. The SROC curve indicated that the area under the curve was 0.90 (95% CI 0.87-0.92). The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and DOR for experienced radiologists were 0.82 (95% CI 0.69-0.91), 0.83 (95% CI 0.76-0.89), 4.9 (95% CI 3.4-7.0), 0.22 (95% CI 0.12-0.38), and 23 (95% CI 11-46), respectively. The SROC curve indicated that the area under the curve was 0.96 (95% CI 0.94-0.97).

conclusionThe sensitivity of the CAD system in the diagnosis of thyroid nodules was similar to that of experienced radiologists. However, the CAD system had lower specificity and DOR than experienced radiologists. The CAD system may play the potential role as a decision-making assistant alongside radiologists in the thyroid nodules' diagnosis. Future technical improvements would be helpful to increase the accuracy as well as diagnostic efficiency.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDiagnosis, Computer-AssistedDiagnosis, DifferentialHumansRadiologistsROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificityThyroid NeoplasmsThyroid NoduleUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID31393347
PMCPMC6709241
OpenAlexW2968715758

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.