ArticleCancers2021
Artificial Intelligence in Gastric Cancer: Identifying Gastric Cancer Using Endoscopic Images with Convolutional Neural Network.
Article in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Artificial Intelligence Performance in Image-Based Cancer Identification: Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Diagnostic performance of AI-assisted endoscopy diagnosis of digestive system tumors: an umbrella review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- The value of machine learning approaches in the diagnosis of early gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Limited discriminative performance of endoscopic deep learning forFrontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Current Role of Artificial Intelligence in the Management of Gastric Cancer.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Beyond Biomarkers: Machine Learning-Driven Multiomics for Personalized Medicine in Gastric Cancer.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- The Role of Prophylactic Gastrectomy in Gastric Adenocarcinoma and Proximal Polyposis of the Stomach: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Deep Learning and Gastric Cancer: Systematic Review of AI-Assisted Endoscopy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Dementia: A Bibliometric Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Statins and the Risk of Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- BM-Net: CNN-Based MobileNet-V3 and Bilinear Structure for Breast Cancer Detection in Whole Slide Images.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most newly diagnosed cancers and the fifth leading cause of death globally. Identification of early gastric cancer (EGC) can ensure quick treatment and reduce significant mortality. Therefore, we aimed to conduct a systematic review with a meta-analysis of current literature to evaluate the performance of the CNN model in detecting EGC. We conducted a systematic search in the online databases (e.g., PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science) for all relevant original studies on the subject of CNN in EGC published between 1 January 2010, and 26 March 2021. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 was used to assess the risk of bias. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio were calculated. Moreover, a summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) was plotted. Of the 171 studies retrieved, 15 studies met inclusion criteria. The application of the CNN model in the diagnosis of EGC achieved a SROC of 0.95, with corresponding sensitivity of 0.89 (0.88-0.89), and specificity of 0.89 (0.89-0.90). Pooled sensitivity and specificity for experts endoscopists were 0.77 (0.76-0.78), and 0.92 (0.91-0.93), respectively. However, the overall SROC for the CNN model and expert endoscopists was 0.95 and 0.90. The findings of this comprehensive study show that CNN model exhibited comparable performance to endoscopists in the diagnosis of EGC using digital endoscopy images. Given its scalability, the CNN model could enhance the performance of endoscopists to correctly stratify EGC patients and reduce work load.
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.