ArticleFrontiers in public health2022
The adding value of contrast-enhanced CT radiomics: Differentiating tuberculosis from non-tuberculous infectious lesions presenting as solid pulmonary nodules or masses.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differentiation of pulmonary tuberculosis from non-tuberculous solid lung lesions using radiomics and clinical-semantic features on contrast-enhanced CT.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the value of contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) and non-contrast-enhanced CT (NCECT) radiomics models in differentiating tuberculosis (TB) from non-tuberculous infectious lesions (NTIL) presenting as solid pulmonary nodules or masses, and develop a combine radiomics model (RM). Materials and methods: This study was a retrospective analysis of 101 lesions in 95 patients, including 49 lesions (from 45 patients) in the TB group and 52 lesions (from 50 patients) in the NTIL group. Lesions were randomly divided into training and test sets in the ratio of 7:3. Conventional imaging features were used to construct a conventional imaging model (IM). Radiomics features screening and NCECT or CECT RM construction were carried out by correlation analysis and gradient boosting decision tree, and logistic regression. Finally, conventional IM, NCECT RM, and CECT RM were used for combine RM construction. Additionally, we recruited three radiologists for independent diagnosis. The differential diagnostic performance of each model was assessed using the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs). Results: The CECT RM (training AUC, 0.874; test AUC, 0.796) outperformed the conventional IM (training AUC, 0.792; test AUC, 0.708), the NCECT RM (training AUC, 0.835; test AUC, 0.704), and three radiologists. The diagnostic efficacy of the combine RM (training AUC, 0.922; test AUC, 0.833) was best in the training and test sets. Conclusions: The diagnostic efficacy of the CECT RM was superior to that of the NCECT RM in identifying TB from NTIL presenting as solid pulmonary nodules or masses. The combine RM had the best performance and may outperform expert radiologists.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.