Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35884593›Full record

ReviewCancers2022

Recent Application of Artificial Intelligence in Non-Gynecological Cancer Cytopathology: A Systematic Review.

Nishant Thakur, Mohammad Rizwan Alam, Jamshid Abdul-Ghafar, Yosep Chong

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Artificial intelligence in the diagnosis and management of gynecologic cancer.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

4 authors.

Nishant ThakurDepartment of Hospital Pathology, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul 06591, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-8761-0837
Mohammad Rizwan AlamDepartment of Hospital Pathology, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul 06591, Korea.
Jamshid Abdul-GhafarDepartment of Hospital Pathology, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul 06591, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-6575-8870
Yosep ChongDepartment of Hospital Pathology, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul 06591, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-8615-3064

Funding

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT) 2021R1A2C2013630
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

State-of-the-art artificial intelligence (AI) has recently gained considerable interest in the healthcare sector and has provided solutions to problems through automated diagnosis. Cytological examination is a crucial step in the initial diagnosis of cancer, although it shows limited diagnostic efficacy. Recently, AI applications in the processing of cytopathological images have shown promising results despite the elementary level of the technology. Here, we performed a systematic review with a quantitative analysis of recent AI applications in non-gynecological (non-GYN) cancer cytology to understand the current technical status. We searched the major online databases, including MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE, for relevant English articles published from January 2010 to January 2021. The searched query terms were: "artificial intelligence", "image processing", "deep learning", "cytopathology", and "fine-needle aspiration cytology." Out of 17,000 studies, only 26 studies (26 models) were included in the full-text review, whereas 13 studies were included for quantitative analysis. There were eight classes of AI models treated of according to target organs: thyroid (

Indexed as

artificial intelligencecancercytopathologydeep learningsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35884593
PMCPMC9316753

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.