Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32936088›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2020

Artificial Intelligence for the Prediction of Helicobacter Pylori Infection in Endoscopic Images: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Of Diagnostic Test Accuracy.

Chang Seok Bang, Jae Jun Lee, Gwang Ho Baik

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
12.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 98 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Diagnostic accuracy of image-based deep learning for glaucomatous optic neuropathy detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Limited discriminative performance of endoscopic deep learning forFrontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Role of artificial intelligence in gastric diseases.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025
    Review
  19. Review
  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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chang Seok BangDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hallym University College of Medicine, Chuncheon, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-4908-5431
Jae Jun LeeInstitute of New Frontier Research, Hallym University College of Medicine, Chuncheon, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-5418-500X
Gwang Ho BaikDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hallym University College of Medicine, Chuncheon, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-1419-7484
Hallym University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHelicobacter pylori plays a central role in the development of gastric cancer, and prediction of H pylori infection by visual inspection of the gastric mucosa is an important function of endoscopy. However, there are currently no established methods of optical diagnosis of H pylori infection using endoscopic images. Definitive diagnosis requires endoscopic biopsy. Artificial intelligence (AI) has been increasingly adopted in clinical practice, especially for image recognition and classification.

objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic test accuracy of AI for the prediction of H pylori infection using endoscopic images.

methodsTwo independent evaluators searched core databases. The inclusion criteria included studies with endoscopic images of H pylori infection and with application of AI for the prediction of H pylori infection presenting diagnostic performance. Systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis were performed.

resultsUltimately, 8 studies were identified. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, and area under the curve of AI for the prediction of H pylori infection were 0.87 (95% CI 0.72-0.94), 0.86 (95% CI 0.77-0.92), 40 (95% CI 15-112), and 0.92 (95% CI 0.90-0.94), respectively, in the 1719 patients (385 patients with H pylori infection vs 1334 controls). Meta-regression showed methodological quality and included the number of patients in each study for the purpose of heterogeneity. There was no evidence of publication bias. The accuracy of the AI algorithm reached 82% for discrimination between noninfected images and posteradication images.

conclusionsAn AI algorithm is a reliable tool for endoscopic diagnosis of H pylori infection. The limitations of lacking external validation performance and being conducted only in Asia should be overcome.

trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42020175957; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=175957.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDiagnostic Tests, RoutineEndoscopyHelicobacter InfectionsHelicobacter pyloriHumansartificial intelligenceconvolutional neural networkdeep learningendoscopyHelicobacter pylorimachine learning

Identifiers

PMID32936088
PMCPMC7527948
OpenAlexW3087638159

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.