Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34880973›Full record

Trial reportJournal of healthcare engineering2021

Utilization of Ultrasonic Image Characteristics Combined with Endoscopic Detection on the Basis of Artificial Intelligence Algorithm in Diagnosis of Early Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer.

Liang Wang, Hui Song, Ming Wang, Hui Wang, Ran Ge, Yan Shen, Yongli Yu

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of healthcare engineering, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Evaluation of deep learning methods for early gastric cancer detection using gastroscopic images.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Liang WangDigestive Endoscope Room, Cangzhou Central Hospital, Cangzhou 061001, Hebei, China.ORCID 0000-0003-1062-7862
Hui SongDepartment of Gastroenterology, Cangzhou Central Hospital, Cangzhou 061001, Hebei, China.ORCID 0000-0002-3935-1866
Ming WangDepartment of Tumor Radiotherapy, Cangzhou Central Hospital, Cangzhou 061001, Hebei, China.ORCID 0000-0002-7728-4158
Hui WangDigestive Endoscope Room, Cangzhou Central Hospital, Cangzhou 061001, Hebei, China.ORCID 0000-0001-9198-9309
Ran GeDigestive Endoscope Room, Cangzhou Central Hospital, Cangzhou 061001, Hebei, China.ORCID 0000-0002-4577-5315
Yan ShenDigestive Endoscope Room, Cangzhou Central Hospital, Cangzhou 061001, Hebei, China.ORCID 0000-0003-2501-7258
Yongli YuDigestive Endoscope Room, Cangzhou Central Hospital, Cangzhou 061001, Hebei, China.ORCID 0000-0003-0290-2481
Cangzhou Central Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of artificial intelligence algorithm combined with ultrasound endoscopy in early esophageal cancer and precancerous lesions by comparing the examination of conventional endoscopy and artificial intelligence algorithm combined with ultrasound endoscopy, and by comparing the real-time diagnosis of endoscopy and the ultrasonic image characteristics of artificial intelligence algorithm combined with endoscopic detection and pathological results. 120 cases were selected. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 80 patients who met the criteria were selected and randomly divided into two groups: endoscopic examination combined with ultrasound imaging based on intelligent algorithm processing (cascade region-convolutional neural network (Cascade RCNN) model algorithm group) and simple use of endoscopy group (control group). This study shows that the ultrasonic image of artificial intelligence algorithm is effective, and the detection performance is better than that of endoscopic detection. The results are close to the gold standard of doctor recognition, and the detection time is greatly shortened, and the recognition time is shortened by 71 frames per second. Compared with the traditional convolutional neural network (CNN) algorithm, the accuracy and recall of image analysis and segmentation using feature pyramid network are increased. The detection rates of CNN model, Cascade RCNN model, and endoscopic detection alone in early esophageal cancer and precancerous lesions are 56.3% (45/80), 88.8% (71/80), and 44.1% (35/80), respectively. The detection rate of Cascade RCNN model and CNN model was higher than that of endoscopy alone, and the difference was statistically significant (

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceGastrointestinal NeoplasmsAlgorithmsEndoscopy, GastrointestinalHumansUltrasonics

Identifiers

PMID34880973
PMCPMC8648460
OpenAlexW3215628199

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.