Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33875821›Full record

ReviewBritish journal of cancer2021

Artificial Intelligence-based methods in head and neck cancer diagnosis: an overview.

Hanya Mahmood, Muhammad Shaban, Nasir Rajpoot, Syed A Khurram

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in British journal of cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 81 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
81citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
14.1field-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

81 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 151 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Artificial intelligence in dysphagia assessment: evaluating lingual muscle composition in head and neck cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

21 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hanya MahmoodAcademic Unit of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Clinical Dentistry, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. h.mahmood@sheffield.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7159-0368
Muhammad ShabanDepartment of Computer Science, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Nasir RajpootDepartment of Computer Science, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Syed A KhurramUnit of Oral & Maxillofacial Pathology, School of Clinical Dentistry, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
University of Sheffield · GBUniversity of Warwick · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 29674Medical Research Council MR/P015476/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis paper reviews recent literature employing Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning (AI/ML) methods for diagnostic evaluation of head and neck cancers (HNC) using automated image analysis.

methodsElectronic database searches using MEDLINE via OVID, EMBASE and Google Scholar were conducted to retrieve articles using AI/ML for diagnostic evaluation of HNC (2009-2020). No restrictions were placed on the AI/ML method or imaging modality used.

resultsIn total, 32 articles were identified. HNC sites included oral cavity (n = 16), nasopharynx (n = 3), oropharynx (n = 3), larynx (n = 2), salivary glands (n = 2), sinonasal (n = 1) and in five studies multiple sites were studied. Imaging modalities included histological (n = 9), radiological (n = 8), hyperspectral (n = 6), endoscopic/clinical (n = 5), infrared thermal (n = 1) and optical (n = 1). Clinicopathologic/genomic data were used in two studies. Traditional ML methods were employed in 22 studies (69%), deep learning (DL) in eight studies (25%) and a combination of these methods in two studies (6%).

conclusionsThere is an increasing volume of studies exploring the role of AI/ML to aid HNC detection using a range of imaging modalities. These methods can achieve high degrees of accuracy that can exceed the abilities of human judgement in making data predictions. Large-scale multi-centric prospective studies are required to aid deployment into clinical practice.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceHead and Neck NeoplasmsHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMachine LearningMedical OncologyPattern Recognition, Automated

Identifiers

PMID33875821
PMCPMC8184820
OpenAlexW3154211345

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.