Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33420815›Full record

ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2021

Transferability of the early-stage ovarian malignancy (EOM) score: an external validation study that includes advanced-stage and metastatic ovarian cancer.

Phichayut Phinyo, Jayanton Patumanond, Panprapha Saenrungmuaeng, Watcharin Chirdchim, Tanyong Pipanmekaporn, Apichat Tantraworasin, Theera Tongsong, Charuwan Tantipalakorn

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

8 authors.

Phichayut PhinyoDepartment of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8543-6254
Jayanton PatumanondCenter for Clinical Epidemiology and Clinical Statistics, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8977-2995
Panprapha SaenrungmuaengDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Mahasarakham University, Maha Sarakham, Thailand.
Watcharin ChirdchimDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Phrapokklao Hospital, Chanthaburi, Thailand.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6865-5009
Tanyong PipanmekapornCenter for Clinical Epidemiology and Clinical Statistics, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7154-5671
Apichat TantraworasinCenter for Clinical Epidemiology and Clinical Statistics, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7913-2799
Theera TongsongDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand. theera.t@cmu.ac.th.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3389-6478
Charuwan TantipalakornDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand. nokctantipa@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1343-0782

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo validate the diagnostic performance of the Early-stage Ovarian Malignancy (EOM) score in an external dataset that includes advanced-stage and metastatic ovarian cancer.

methodsThe data from two cross-sectional cohorts were used in the statistical analysis. The development dataset of the EOM score was collected in Phrapokklao Hospital between September 2013 and December 2017. The validation dataset was collected in Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai Hospital between April 2010 and March 2018. The internal and external performance of the EOM score was evaluated in terms of discrimination via area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AuROC) and calibration.

resultsThere were 270 and 479 patients included in the development and validation datasets, respectively. The prevalence of ovarian malignancy was 20.0% (54/270) in the development set and 30.3% (145/479) in the validation set. The EOM score had excellent discriminative ability in both the development and validation sets (AuROC 88.0 (95% CI 82.6, 93.9) and 88.0 (95% CI 84.3, 91.4), respectively). The EOM score also showed good calibration in both datasets.

conclusionsThe EOM score had consistent diagnostic performance in the external validation data. It is recommended for use as a triage tool in patient referrals instead of the RMI in settings where experienced sonographers are not available.

Indexed as

Ovarian NeoplasmsCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansNeoplasm MetastasisPrevalenceRisk AssessmentROC CurveTriageAdnexal massesDiagnosisOvarian cancerRisk of malignancy index

Identifiers

PMID33420815

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.