Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33052431›Full record

ArticleDer Pathologe2020

[Artificial intelligence and machine learning in oncologic imaging].

Jens Kleesiek, Jacob M Murray, Christian Strack, Sebastian Prinz, Georgios Kaissis, Rickmer Braren

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Pathologe, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. [A primer on machine learning].Der Radiologe · 2020
    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

6 authors.

Jens KleesiekAG Computational Radiology, Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Deutschland. jens.kleesiek@uk-essen.de.
Jacob M MurrayAG Computational Radiology, Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Christian StrackAG Computational Radiology, Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Sebastian PrinzAG Computational Radiology, Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Georgios KaissisDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, München, Deutschland.
Rickmer BrarenGerman Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Heidelberg, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Machine learning (ML) is entering many areas of society, including medicine. This transformation has the potential to drastically change medicine and medical practice. These aspects become particularly clear when considering the different stages of oncologic patient care and the involved interdisciplinary and intermodality interactions. In recent publications, computers-in collaboration with humans or alone-have been outperforming humans regarding tumor identification, tumor classification, estimating prognoses, and evaluation of treatments. In addition, ML algorithms, e.g., artificial neural networks (ANNs), which constitute the drivers behind many of the latest achievements in ML, can deliver this level of performance in a reproducible, fast, and inexpensive manner. In the future, artificial intelligence applications will become an integral part of the medical profession and offer advantages for oncologic diagnostics and treatment.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDiagnostic ImagingMachine LearningAlgorithmsHumansNeoplasmsNeural Networks, ComputerComputer-assisted image processingDeep learningDiagnostic imagingMachine learningNeural networks (computer)

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.