Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35679042›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2022

Diagnostic Performance of the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) Ultrasound Risk Score in Women in the United States.

Priyanka Jha, Akshya Gupta, Timothy M Baran, Katherine E Maturen, Krupa Patel-Lippmann, Hanna M Zafar, Aya Kamaya, Neha Antil, Lisa Barroilhet, Elizabeth A Sadowski

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
11.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Priyanka JhaUniversity of California, San Francisco, San Francisco.
Akshya GuptaUniversity of Rochester, Rochester, New York.
Timothy M BaranUniversity of Rochester, Rochester, New York.
Katherine E MaturenUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Krupa Patel-LippmannVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Hanna M ZafarUniversity of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Aya KamayaStanford University, Stanford, California.
Neha AntilStanford University, Stanford, California.
Lisa BarroilhetUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison.
Elizabeth A SadowskiUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison.
Stanford University · USUniversity of Rochester · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · USUniversity of Michigan–Ann Arbor · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · USVanderbilt University Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The American College of Radiology (ACR) Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) ultrasound (US) risk scoring system has been studied in a selected population of women referred for suspected or known adnexal lesions. This population has a higher frequency of malignant neoplasms than women presenting to radiology departments for pelvic ultrasonography for a variety of indications, potentially impacting the diagnostic performance of the risk scoring system. Objective: To evaluate the risk of malignant neoplasm and diagnostic performance of O-RADS US risk scoring system in a multi-institutional, nonselected cohort. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multi-institutional cohort study included a population of nonselected women in the United States who presented to radiology departments for routine pelvic ultrasonography between 2011 and 2014, with pathology confirmation imaging follow up or 2 years of clinical follow up. Exposure: Analysis of 1014 adnexal lesions using the O-RADS US risk stratification system. Main Outcomes and Measures: Frequency of ovarian cancer and diagnostic performance of the O-RADS US risk stratification system. Results: This study included 913 women with 1014 adnexal lesions. The mean (SD) age of the patients was 42.4 (13.9 years), and 674 of 913 (73.8%) were premenopausal. The overall frequency of malignant neoplasm was 8.4% (85 of 1014 adnexal lesions). The frequency of malignant neoplasm for O-RADS US 2 was 0.5% (3 of 657 lesions; <1% expected); O-RADS US 3, 4.5% (5 of 112 lesions; <10% expected); O-RADS US 4, 11.6% (18 of 155; 10%-50% expected); and O-RADS 5, 65.6% (59 of 90 lesions; >50% expected). O-RADS US 4 was the optimum cutoff for diagnosing cancer with sensitivity of 90.6% (95% CI, 82.3%-95.9%), specificity of 81.9% (95% CI, 79.3%-84.3%), positive predictive value of 31.4% (95% CI, 25.7%-37.7%) and negative predictive value of 99.0% (95% CI, 98.0%-99.6%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of a nonselected patient population, the O-RADS US risk stratification system performed within the expected range as published by the ACR O-RADS US committee. The frequency of malignant neoplasm was at the lower end of the published range, partially because of the lower prevalence of cancer in a nonselected population. However, a high negative predictive value was maintained, and when a lesion can be classified as an O-RADS US 2, the risk of cancer is low, which is reassuring for both clinician and patient.

Indexed as

Ovarian NeoplasmsAdultCohort StudiesFemaleHumansPredictive Value of TestsRisk FactorsUltrasonographyUnited States

Identifiers

PMID35679042
PMCPMC9185186
OpenAlexW4282023307

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.