Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35162902›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Artificial Intelligence in Bone Metastases: An MRI and CT Imaging Review.

Eliodoro Faiella, Domiziana Santucci, Alessandro Calabrese, Fabrizio Russo, Gianluca Vadalà, Bruno Beomonte Zobel, Paolo Soda, Giulio Iannello, Carlo de Felice, Vincenzo Denaro

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Radiomics in spinal research: a narrative review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Radiomics in Lung Metastases: A Systematic Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023
    Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

10 authors.

Eliodoro FaiellaDepartment of Radiology, University of Rome "Campus Bio-Medico", Via Alvaro del Portillo, 00128 Roma, Italy.
Domiziana SantucciDepartment of Radiology, University of Rome "Campus Bio-Medico", Via Alvaro del Portillo, 00128 Roma, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4903-8715
Alessandro CalabreseDepartment of Radiology, University of Rome "Sapienza", Viale del Policlinico, 00161 Roma, Italy.
Fabrizio RussoDepartment of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, University of Rome "Campus Bio-Medico", Via Alvaro del Portillo, 00128 Roma, Italy.
Gianluca VadalàDepartment of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, University of Rome "Campus Bio-Medico", Via Alvaro del Portillo, 00128 Roma, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7142-1660
Bruno Beomonte ZobelDepartment of Radiology, University of Rome "Campus Bio-Medico", Via Alvaro del Portillo, 00128 Roma, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9227-5535
Paolo SodaUnit of Computer Systems and Bioinformatics, Department of Engineering, University of Rome "Campus Bio-Medico", Via Alvaro del Portillo, 00128 Roma, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2621-072X
Giulio IannelloUnit of Computer Systems and Bioinformatics, Department of Engineering, University of Rome "Campus Bio-Medico", Via Alvaro del Portillo, 00128 Roma, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3864-5800
Carlo de FeliceDepartment of Radiology, University of Rome "Sapienza", Viale del Policlinico, 00161 Roma, Italy.
Vincenzo DenaroDepartment of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, University of Rome "Campus Bio-Medico", Via Alvaro del Portillo, 00128 Roma, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

(1) Background: The purpose of this review is to study the role of radiomics as a supporting tool in predicting bone disease status, differentiating benign from malignant bone lesions, and characterizing malignant bone lesions. (2) Methods: Two reviewers conducted the literature search independently. Thirteen articles on radiomics as a decision support tool for bone lesions were selected. The quality of the methodology was evaluated according to the radiomics quality score (RQS). (3) Results: All studies were published between 2018 and 2021 and were retrospective in design. Eleven (85%) studies were MRI-based, and two (15%) were CT-based. The sample size was <200 patients for all studies. There is significant heterogeneity in the literature, as evidenced by the relatively low RQS value (average score = 22.6%). There is not a homogeneous protocol used for MRI sequences among the different studies, although the highest predictive ability was always obtained in T2W-FS. Six articles (46%) reported on the potential application of the model in a clinical setting with a decision curve analysis (DCA). (4) Conclusions: Despite the variability in the radiomics method application, the similarity of results and conclusions observed is encouraging. Substantial limits were found; prospective and multicentric studies are needed to affirm the role of radiomics as a supporting tool.

Indexed as

bone cancerbone metastasisCTlung cancermachine learningMRIprostate cancerradiomicssignature

Identifiers

PMID35162902
PMCPMC8834956

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.