ArticleArtificial intelligence in medicine2022
A multi-stage machine learning model for diagnosis of esophageal manometry.
Article in Artificial intelligence in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence in Gastrointestinal Motility Diagnostics: A Systematic Review.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2026Pooled it
- AI in Esophageal Motility Disorders: Systematic Review of High-Resolution Manometry Studies.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence in High-resolution Anorectal Manometry: Current Applications and Future Directions.Current gastroenterology reports · 2026Review
- Multimodal graph-based classification of esophageal motility disorders.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence for Diagnosis of Esophageal Manometry: A Narrative Review.Current gastroenterology reports · 2026Review
- Development of a diagnostic model for esophageal achalasia assessed by esophageal high-resolution manometry using artificial intelligence.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence and FLIP Panometry-Automated Classification of Esophageal Motility Patterns.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Future perspectives in esophageal manometry.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- A deep learning-based approach to enhance accuracy and feasibility of long-term high-resolution manometry examinations.Communications medicine · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence tools for the assessment and management of dysphagia: protocol for a scoping review.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Article
- Gemini-Assisted Deep Learning Classification Model for Automated Diagnosis of High-Resolution Esophageal Manometry Images.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- An introduction to machine learning and generative artificial intelligence for otolaryngologists-head and neck surgeons: a narrative review.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2024Review
- Artificial Intelligence Tools for Improving Manometric Diagnosis of Esophageal Dysmotility.Current gastroenterology reports · 2024Review
- An artificial intelligence platform provides an accurate interpretation of esophageal motility from Functional Lumen Imaging Probe Panometry studies.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2023Article
- Automated Chicago Classification for Esophageal Motility Disorder Diagnosis Using Machine Learning.Sensors (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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
High-resolution manometry (HRM) is the primary procedure used to diagnose esophageal motility disorders. Its manual interpretation and classification, including evaluation of swallow-level outcomes and then derivation of a study-level diagnosis based on Chicago Classification (CC), may be limited by inter-rater variability and inaccuracy of an individual interpreter. We hypothesized that an automatic diagnosis platform using machine learning and artificial intelligence approaches could be developed to accurately identify esophageal motility diagnoses. Further, a multi-stage modeling framework, akin to the step-wise approach of the CC, was utilized to leverage advantages of a combination of machine learning approaches including deep-learning models and feature-based models. Models were trained and tested using a dataset comprised of 1741 patients' HRM studies with CC diagnoses assigned by expert physician raters. In the swallow-level stage, three models based on convolutional neural networks (CNNs) were developed to predict swallow type and swallow pressurization (test accuracies of 0.88 and 0.93, respectively), and integrated relaxation pressure (IRP)(regression model with test error of 4.49 mmHg). At the study-level stage, model selection from families of the expert-knowledge-based rule models, xgboost models and artificial neural network(ANN) models were conducted. A simple model-agnostic strategy of model balancing motivated by Bayesian principles was utilized, which gave rise to model averaging weighted by precision scores. The averaged (blended) models and individual models were compared and evaluated, of which the best performance on test dataset is 0.81 in top-1 prediction, 0.92 in top-2 predictions. This is the first artificial-intelligence style model to automatically predict esophageal motility (CC) diagnoses from HRM studies using raw multi-swallow data and it achieved high accuracy. Thus, this proposed modeling framework could be broadly applied to assist with HRM interpretation in a clinical setting.
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.