Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35747810›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022

Development, Validation, and Comparison of Image-Based, Clinical Feature-Based and Fusion Artificial Intelligence Diagnostic Models in Differentiating Benign and Malignant Pulmonary Ground-Glass Nodules.

Xiang Wang, Man Gao, Jicai Xie, Yanfang Deng, Wenting Tu, Hua Yang, Shuang Liang, Panlong Xu, Mingzi Zhang, Yang Lu and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

14 authors.

Xiang WangDepartment of Radiology, Changzheng Hospital, Navy Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Man GaoDepartment of Radiology, Changzheng Hospital, Navy Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Jicai XieDepartment of Radiology, The Second People's Hospital of Yuhuan, Yuhuan, China.
Yanfang DengDepartment of Radiology, Longyan First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fujian, China.
Wenting TuDepartment of Radiology, Changzheng Hospital, Navy Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Hua YangDepartment of Research, Shanghai Aitrox Technology Corporation Limited, Shanghai, China.
Shuang LiangDepartment of Research, Shanghai Aitrox Technology Corporation Limited, Shanghai, China.
Panlong XuDepartment of Research, Shanghai Aitrox Technology Corporation Limited, Shanghai, China.
Mingzi ZhangDepartment of Research, Shanghai Aitrox Technology Corporation Limited, Shanghai, China.
Yang LuDepartment of Research, Shanghai Aitrox Technology Corporation Limited, Shanghai, China.
ChiCheng FuDepartment of Research, Shanghai Aitrox Technology Corporation Limited, Shanghai, China.
Qiong LiDepartment of Radiology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center (SYSUCC), Guangzhou, China.
Li FanDepartment of Radiology, Changzheng Hospital, Navy Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Shiyuan LiuDepartment of Radiology, Changzheng Hospital, Navy Medical University, Shanghai, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to develop effective artificial intelligence (AI) diagnostic models based on CT images of pulmonary nodules only, on descriptional and quantitative clinical or image features, or on a combination of both to differentiate benign and malignant ground-glass nodules (GGNs) to assist in the determination of surgical intervention. Methods: Our study included a total of 867 nodules (benign nodules: 112; malignant nodules: 755) with postoperative pathological diagnoses from two centers. For the diagnostic models to discriminate between benign and malignant GGNs, we adopted three different artificial intelligence (AI) approaches: a) an image-based deep learning approach to build a deep neural network (DNN); b) a clinical feature-based machine learning approach based on the clinical and image features of nodules; c) a fusion diagnostic model integrating the original images and the clinical and image features. The performance of the models was evaluated on an internal test dataset (the "Changzheng Dataset") and an independent test dataset collected from an external institute (the "Longyan Dataset"). In addition, the performance of automatic diagnostic models was compared with that of manual evaluations by two radiologists on the 'Longyan dataset'. Results: The image-based deep learning model achieved an appealing diagnostic performance, yielding AUC values of 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62, 0.89) and 0.76 (95% CI: 0.61, 0.90), respectively, on both the Changzheng and Longyan datasets. The clinical feature-based machine learning model performed well on the Changzheng dataset (AUC, 0.80 [95% CI: 0.64, 0.96]), whereas it performed poorly on the Longyan dataset (AUC, 0.62 [95% CI: 0.42, 0.83]). The fusion diagnostic model achieved the best performance on both the Changzheng dataset (AUC, 0.82 [95% CI: 0.71-0.93]) and the Longyan dataset (AUC, 0.83 [95% CI: 0.70-0.96]), and it achieved a better specificity (0.69) than the radiologists (0.33-0.44) on the Longyan dataset. Conclusion: The deep learning models, including both the image-based deep learning model and the fusion model, have the ability to assist radiologists in differentiating between benign and malignant nodules for the precise management of patients with GGNs.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencecomputed tomographycomputer-aided diagnosisdifferential diagnosisground-glass nodule

Identifiers

PMID35747810
PMCPMC9209648

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.