ArticleClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2021
Comparison of Different Ultrasound Classification Systems of Thyroid Nodules for Identifying Malignant Potential: A Cross-sectional Study.
Article in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Diagnostic efficiency of existing guidelines and the AI-SONIC™ artificial intelligence for ultrasound-based risk assessment of thyroid nodules.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIn our organization, it has been necessary in our organization to calculate the risk categories according to the American Thyroid Association (ATA), the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology/Associazione Medici Endocrinologi (AACE/ACE/AME), and the American College of Radiology Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (ACR TIRADS) classification systems for each patient, from the year 2019; these are also required to be registered in the database. This creates a barrier to medical collaboration in everyday radiological practice because using multiple rating systems can be confusing for both readers and patients. For the change in routine practice, this study aimed to compare diagnostic parameters of the ATA, AACE/ACE/AME, and ACR TIRADS classification systems for the detection of suspicious thyroid nodule(s) considering the results of fine-needle aspiration cytopathology as the reference standard.
methodsData on ultrasound characteristics (2,000 nodules) and fine-needle aspiration cytopathology (39 nodules) were included in the analysis. The decision making of fine-needle aspiration biopsies was evaluated from the ultrasound characteristics as per the ATA, AACE/ACE/AME, and ACR TIRADS classification systems.
resultsThe ATA, AACE/ACE/AME, and ACR TIRADS recommended 26, 32, and 37 nodules for fine-needle aspiration biopsies, respectively. Considering the results of fine-needle aspiration cytopathology as the reference standard, the ATA, AACE/ACE/AME, and ACR TIRADS classification systems had 0.993, 0.996, and 0.998 sensitivity, respectively. The accuracies were 0.641, 0.795, and 0.923, respectively.
conclusionThe ACR TIRADS classification system is less invasive and can identify suspicious nodules more accurately than that of ATA and AACE/ACE/AME.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.