Observational studyMedicine2019
Evaluation of the diagnostic performance of a decision tree model in suspected acute appendicitis with equivocal preoperative computed tomography findings compared with Alvarado, Eskelinen, and adult appendicitis scores: A STARD compliant article.
Observational study in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence and Acute Appendicitis: A Systematic Review of Diagnostic and Prognostic Models.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2023Pooled it
- Can Artificial Intelligence Revolutionise Surgical Decision-Making for Appendectomy? A Narrative Review.Surgical innovation · 2026Review
- A hybrid machine learning approach to improve the diagnostic accuracy of acute appendicitis.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in acute appendicitis: A comprehensive review of machine learning and deep learning applications.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Progress in the application of machine learning in CT diagnosis of acute appendicitis.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Review
- Machine Learning and Feature Selection in Pediatric Appendicitis.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2025Article
- Efficacy of automated machine learning models and feature engineering for diagnosis of equivocal appendicitis using clinical and computed tomography findings.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Appendiceal wall thickness and Alvarado score are predictive of acute appendicitis in the patients with equivocal computed tomography findings.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Acute appendicitis-advances and controversies.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2021Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluated the diagnostic performance of a new clinical approach based on decision tree (DT) analysis in adult patients with equivocal computed tomography (CT) findings of acute appendicitis (AA) compared with previous scoring systems.This retrospective study of 244 adult patients with equivocal CT findings included appendicitis (AG, n = 80) and non-appendicitis (NAG, n = 164) groups. The chi-squared automatic interaction detection algorithm was for AA prediction. A receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and area under the curve (AUC) were used to compare the DT analysis with Alvarado, Eskelinen score, and adult appendicitis scores (AAS).The following factors were selected for AA prediction: rebound tenderness severity, migration, urinalysis, symptom duration, leukocytosis, neutrophil count, and C-reactive protein levels. The DT comprised 11 final nodes with the following AA probabilities: node 1, 100% (16/16); node 2, 90% (9/10); node 3, 80% (8/10); node 4, 60.9% (14/23); node 5, 50% (3/6); node 6, 43.8% (7/16); node 7, 22.6% (12/53); node 8, 13% (10/77); node 9, 5.6% (1/18); node 10, 0% (0/12); and node 11, 0% (0/3). The AUC of the DT was higher (0.850 [95% confidence interval {CI}; 0.799-0.893]) than the Alvarado score (0.695 [95% CI; 0.633-0.752]), AAS (0.749 [95% CI; 0.690-0.802]), and the Eskelinen score (0.715 [95% CI; 0.654-0.770]). The results were statistically significant when compared with the AUCs of the Alvarado score, Eskelinen score, and AAS (P < .001, P < .001, P = .003, respectively).The DT-based approach facilitated AA diagnosis and determination of clinical status in patients with equivocal preoperative CT findings and ambiguous results.
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.