Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35549574›Full record

SynthesisInterventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences2023

Application of convolutional network models in detection of intracranial aneurysms: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Saeed Abdollahifard, Amirmohammad Farrokhi, Fatemeh Kheshti, Mahtab Jalali, Ashkan Mowla

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Saeed AbdollahifardResearch center for neuromodulation and pain, Shiraz, Iran.
Amirmohammad FarrokhiResearch center for neuromodulation and pain, Shiraz, Iran.ORCID 0000-0003-0769-9304
Fatemeh KheshtiResearch center for neuromodulation and pain, Shiraz, Iran.
Mahtab JalaliResearch center for neuromodulation and pain, Shiraz, Iran.
Ashkan MowlaDivision of Stroke and Endovascular Neurosurgery, Department of Neurological Surgery, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California (USC), Los Angeles, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5352-8747
Shiraz University of Medical Sciences · IRUniversity of Southern California · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIntracranial aneurysms have a high prevalence in human population. It also has a heavy burden of disease and high mortality rate in the case of rupture. Convolutional neural network(CNN) is a type of deep learning architecture which has been proven powerful to detect intracranial aneurysms.

methodsFour databases were searched using artificial intelligence, intracranial aneurysms, and synonyms to find eligible studies. Articles which had applied CNN for detection of intracranial aneurisms were included in this review. Sensitivity and specificity of the models and human readers regarding modality, size, and location of aneurysms were sought to be extracted. Random model was the preferred model for analyses using CMA 2 to determine pooled sensitivity and specificity.

resultsOverall, 20 studies were used in this review. Deep learning models could detect intracranial aneurysms with a sensitivity of 90/6% (CI: 87/2-93/2%) and specificity of 94/6% (CI: 0/914-0/966). CTA was the most sensitive modality (92.0%(CI:85/2-95/8%)). Overall sensitivity of the models for aneurysms more than 3 mm was above 98% (98%-100%) and 74.6 for aneurysms less than 3 mm. With the aid of AI, the clinicians' sensitivity increased to 12/8% and interrater agreement to 0/193.

conclusionCNN models had an acceptable sensitivity for detection of intracranial aneurysms, surpassing human readers in some fields. The logical approach for application of deep learning models would be its use as a highly capable assistant. In essence, deep learning models are a groundbreaking technology that can assist clinicians and allow them to diagnose intracranial aneurysms more accurately.

Indexed as

Intracranial AneurysmArtificial IntelligenceCerebral AngiographyHumansNeural Networks, ComputerSensitivity and SpecificityCNNconvolutional neural networkIntracranial aneurysms

Identifiers

PMID35549574
PMCPMC10680951
OpenAlexW4280532498

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.