ArticleInsights into imaging2023
Systematic review with radiomics quality score of cholangiocarcinoma: an EuSoMII Radiomics Auditing Group Initiative.
Article in Insights into imaging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Radiomics of the Paranasal Sinuses: A Systematic Review of Computer-Assisted Techniques to Assess Computed Tomography Radiological Data.American journal of rhinology & allergy · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluating the quality of radiomics-based studies for endometrial cancer using RQS and METRICS tools.European radiology · 2025Pooled it
- Current status and quality of radiomics studies for predicting outcome in acute ischemic stroke patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Pooled it
- Radiomics for Detection and Differentiation of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cancers · 2026Review
- Reproducibility of methodological radiomics score (METRICS): an intra- and inter-rater reliability study endorsed by EuSoMII.European radiology · 2025Article
- Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT)-based radiomics in head and neck cancers: a systematic review and radiomics quality score assessment.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Review
- Radiomics in CT and MR imaging of the liver and pancreas: tools with potential for clinical application.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Review
- A CT-based radiomics approach to predict intra-tumoral tertiary lymphoid structures and recurrence of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.Insights into imaging · 2023Article
- Radiomics Applications in Spleen Imaging: A Systematic Review and Methodological Quality Assessment.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Radiomics Analysis for Multiple Myeloma: A Systematic Review with Radiomics Quality Scoring.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
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
objectivesTo systematically review current research applications of radiomics in patients with cholangiocarcinoma and to assess the quality of CT and MRI radiomics studies.
methodsA systematic search was conducted on PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, and Scopus databases to identify original studies assessing radiomics of cholangiocarcinoma on CT and/or MRI. Three readers with different experience levels independently assessed quality of the studies using the radiomics quality score (RQS). Subgroup analyses were performed according to journal type, year of publication, quartile and impact factor (from the Journal Citation Report database), type of cholangiocarcinoma, imaging modality, and number of patients.
resultsA total of 38 original studies including 6242 patients (median 134 patients) were selected. The median RQS was 9 (corresponding to 25.0% of the total RQS; IQR 1-13) for reader 1, 8 (22.2%, IQR 3-12) for reader 2, and 10 (27.8%; IQR 5-14) for reader 3. The inter-reader agreement was good with an ICC of 0.75 (95% CI 0.62-0.85) for the total RQS. All studies were retrospective and none of them had phantom assessment, imaging at multiple time points, nor performed cost-effectiveness analysis. The RQS was significantly higher in studies published in journals with impact factor > 4 (median 11 vs. 4, p = 0.048 for reader 1) and including more than 100 patients (median 11.5 vs. 0.5, p < 0.001 for reader 1).
conclusionsQuality of radiomics studies on cholangiocarcinoma is insufficient based on the radiomics quality score. Future research should consider prospective studies with a standardized methodology, validation in multi-institutional external cohorts, and open science data.
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.