Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32366933›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

A Diagnostic Algorithm using Multi-parametric MRI to Differentiate Benign from Malignant Myometrial Tumors: Machine-Learning Method.

Mahrooz Malek, Elnaz Tabibian, Milad Rahimi Dehgolan, Maryam Rahmani, Setareh Akhavan, Shahrzad Sheikh Hasani, Fatemeh Nili, Hassan Hashemi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Artificial Intelligence in Obstetric and Gynecological MR Imaging.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2025
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Differentiating uterine sarcoma from leiomyoma: BETThe British journal of radiology · 2021
    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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mahrooz MalekAdvanced Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology Research Center (ADIR), Radiology Department, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex (IKHC), Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, No. 1419733141, Iran.
Elnaz TabibianAdvanced Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology Research Center (ADIR), Radiology Department, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex (IKHC), Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, No. 1419733141, Iran. elnaz.tabibian@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3041-0783
Milad Rahimi DehgolanFaculty of Electrical Engineering, K.N. Toosi University of Technology, Tehran, No. 1631714191, Iran.
Maryam RahmaniAdvanced Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology Research Center (ADIR), Radiology Department, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex (IKHC), Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, No. 1419733141, Iran.
Setareh AkhavanGynecology Oncology Department, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex (IKHC), Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, No. 1419733141, Iran.
Shahrzad Sheikh HasaniGynecology Oncology Department, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex (IKHC), Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, No. 1419733141, Iran.
Fatemeh NiliPathology Department, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex (IKHC), Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, No. 1419733141, Iran.
Hassan HashemiAdvanced Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology Research Center (ADIR), Radiology Department, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex (IKHC), Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, No. 1419733141, Iran.
Imam Khomeini Hospital · IRK.N.Toosi University of Technology · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to develop a diagnostic algorithm for preoperative differentiating uterine sarcoma from leiomyoma through a supervised machine-learning method using multi-parametric MRI. A total of 65 participants with 105 myometrial tumors were included: 84 benign and 21 malignant lesions (belonged to 51 and 14 patients, respectively; based on their postoperative tissue diagnosis). Multi-parametric MRI including T1-, T2-, and diffusion-weighted (DW) sequences with ADC-map, contrast-enhanced images, as well as MR spectroscopy (MRS), was performed for each lesion. Thirteen singular MRI features were extracted from the mentioned sequences. Various combination sets of selective features were fed into a machine classifier (coarse decision-tree) to predict malignant or benign tumors. The accuracy metrics of either singular or combinational models were assessed. Eventually, two diagnostic algorithms, a simple decision-tree and a complex one were proposed using the most accurate models. Our final simple decision-tree obtained accuracy = 96.2%, sensitivity = 100% and specificity = 95%; while the complex tree yielded accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of 100%. To summarise, the complex diagnostic algorithm, compared to the simple one, can differentiate tumors with equal sensitivity, but a higher specificity and accuracy. However, it needs some further time-consuming modalities and difficult imaging calculations. Trading-off costs and benefits in appropriate situations must be determinative.

Indexed as

Machine LearningAdultAlgorithmsDecision TreesDiagnosis, Computer-AssistedFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedLeiomyomaMagnetic Resonance ImagingMagnetic Resonance SpectroscopyMiddle AgedMyometriumPredictive Value of TestsPremenopauseReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID32366933
PMCPMC7198618
OpenAlexW3022731016

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.