ArticleClinical and experimental medicine2023
Watson for oncology decision system for treatment consistency study in breast cancer.
Article in Clinical and experimental medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Leveraging artificial intelligence to support surgical oncology multidisciplinary team decision-making: a systematic review.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Pooled it
- Consistency of CSCO AI with Multidisciplinary Clinical Decision-Making Teams in Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Study.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2024Article
- Novel research and future prospects of artificial intelligence in cancer diagnosis and treatment.Journal of hematology & oncology · 2023Review
- Article
- Use and accuracy of decision support systems using artificial intelligence for tumor diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Perceptions, Attitudes, and Concerns on Artificial Intelligence Applications in Patients with Cancer.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Watson for Oncology (WFO) decision system has been rolled out in many cancers. However, the consistency of treatment for breast cancer is still unclear in relatively economically disadvantaged areas. Patients with postoperative adjuvant stage (January 2017 to December 2017) and advanced-stage breast cancer (January 2014 to December 2018) in northwest of China were included in this study. Patient information was imported to make treatment decisions using Watson version 19.20 analysis and subsequently compared with clinician decisions and analyzed for influencing factors. A total of 263 patients with postoperative adjuvant breast cancer and 200 with advanced breast cancer were included in this study. The overall treatment modality for WFO was in 80.2% and 50.5% agreement with clinicians in the adjuvant and advanced-stage population, respectively. In adjuvant treatment after breast cancer surgery, menopausal status (odds ratio (OR) = 2.89, P = 0.012, 95% CI, 1.260-6.630), histological grade (OR = 0.22, P = 0.019, 95% CI, 0.061-0.781) and tumor stage (OR = 0.22, P = 0.042, 95% CI, 0.050-0.943) were independent factors affecting the concordance between the two stages. In the first-line treatment of advanced breast cancer, hormone receptor status was a factor influencing the consistency of treatment (χ
Indexed as
Identifiers
36138331What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.