ArticleUrolithiasis2020
A neural network-based algorithm for predicting the spontaneous passage of ureteral stones.
Article in Urolithiasis, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Predictive value of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio for the clinical outcome of patients with ureteral stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC urology · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence in urolithiasis: a systematic review of utilization and effectiveness.World journal of urology · 2024Pooled it
- The Ascent of Artificial Intelligence in Endourology: a Systematic Review Over the Last 2 Decades.Current urology reports · 2021Pooled it
- Development and multi-institutional validation of the Swin transformer model for prediction of spontaneous passage of ureteral calculi: A retrospective multicentric study.Urolithiasis · 2025Article
- Current and Future Applications of Artificial Intelligence to Diagnose and Treat Male Infertility.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2025Review
- Two novel deep-learning models to predict spontaneous ureteral calculi passage: Model development and validation.Current urology · 2024Article
- Transforming urinary stone disease management by artificial intelligence-based methods: A comprehensive review.Asian journal of urology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, a prototype artificial neural network model (ANN) was used to estimate the stone passage rate and to determine the effectivity of predictive factors on this rate in patients with ureteral stones. The retrospective study included a total of 192 patients with ureteral stones, comprising 128 (66.7%) men and 64 (33.3%) women. Patients were divided into two groups. Group 1 (n: 125) consisted of people who spontaneously passed their stones, Group 2 (n: 67) consisted of people who could not pass stones spontaneously. The groups were compared with regard to the relationship between input data and stone passage rate by using both ANN and standard statistical tests. To implement the ANN, the patients were randomly divided into three groups: (a) training group (n = 132), (b) validation group (n = 30), and (c) test group (n = 30). The accuracy rate of ANN in the estimation of the stone passage ratio was 99.1% in the group a, 89.9% in the group b, and 87.3% in the group c. It was revealed that certain criteria (stone size, body weight, pain score, ESR, and CRP) were relatively more significant for saving treatment cost and time and for avoiding unnecessary treatment. ANN can be highly useful for the avoidance of unnecessary interventions in patients with ureteral stones as it showed remarkably high performance in the estimation of stone passage rate (99.16%).
Indexed as
Identifiers
31667542What 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.