Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32299197›Full record

ArticleUltrasonography (Seoul, Korea)2020

Application of machine learning to ultrasound images to differentiate follicular neoplasms of the thyroid gland.

Ilah Shin, Young Jae Kim, Kyunghwa Han, Eunjung Lee, Hye Jung Kim, Jung Hee Shin, Hee Jung Moon, Ji Hyun Youk, Kwang Gi Kim, Jin Young Kwak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. A comparison of artificial intelligence versus radiologists in the diagnosis of thyroid nodules using ultrasonography: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

10 authors.

Ilah ShinDepartment of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Young Jae KimDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Gachon University College of Medicine, Incheon, Korea.
Kyunghwa HanDepartment of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Eunjung LeeDepartment of Computational Science and Engineering, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea.
Hye Jung KimDepartment of Radiology, Kyungpook National University Chilgok Hospital, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea.
Jung Hee ShinDepartment of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Hee Jung MoonDepartment of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Ji Hyun YoukDepartment of Radiology, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Kwang Gi KimDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Gachon University College of Medicine, Incheon, Korea.
Jin Young KwakDepartment of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic performance of machine learning in differentiating follicular adenoma from carcinoma using preoperative ultrasonography (US).

methodsIn this retrospective study, preoperative US images of 348 nodules from 340 patients were collected from two tertiary referral hospitals. Two experienced radiologists independently reviewed each image and categorized the nodules according to the 2015 American Thyroid Association guideline. Categorization of a nodule as highly suspicious was considered a positive diagnosis for malignancy. The nodules were manually segmented, and 96 radiomic features were extracted from each region of interest. Ten significant features were selected and used as final input variables in our in-house developed classifier models based on an artificial neural network (ANN) and support vector machine (SVM). The diagnostic performance of radiologists and both classifier models was calculated and compared.

resultsIn total, 252 nodules from 245 patients were confirmed as follicular adenoma and 96 nodules from 95 patients were diagnosed as follicular carcinoma. As measures of diagnostic performance, the average sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the two experienced radiologists in discriminating follicular adenoma from carcinoma on preoperative US images were 24.0%, 84.0%, and 64.8%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the ANN and SVM-based models were 32.3%, 90.1%, and 74.1% and 41.7%, 79.4%, and 69.0%, respectively. The kappa value of the two radiologists was 0.076, corresponding to slight agreement.

conclusionMachine learning-based classifier models may aid in discriminating follicular adenoma from carcinoma using preoperative US.

Indexed as

Artificial neural networkFollicular neoplasmMachine learningSupport vector machineUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID32299197
PMCPMC7315296

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.