ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2023
Use of artificial intelligence for the diagnosis of cholesteatoma.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and Validation of a CNN-Based Diagnostic Pipeline for the Diagnosis of Otitis Media.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in the Diagnosis of Cholesteatoma: A Systematic Review of Current Evidence.Cureus · 2025Review
- A 3D and Explainable Artificial Intelligence Model for Evaluation of Chronic Otitis Media Based on Temporal Bone Computed Tomography: Model Development, Validation, and Clinical Application.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Article
- Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Temporal Bone Imaging: Advances and Future Challenges.Cureus · 2023Review
- Use of artificial intelligence for the diagnosis of cholesteatoma.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2023Article
- Combining Gabor-local and contextual-global deep features for cholesteatoma classification.Science progressArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Accurate diagnosis of cholesteatomas is crucial. However, cholesteatomas can easily be missed in routine otoscopic exams. Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have performed well in medical image classification, so we evaluated their use for detecting cholesteatomas in otoscopic images. Study Design: Design and evaluation of artificial intelligence driven workflow for cholesteatoma diagnosis. Methods: Otoscopic images collected from the faculty practice of the senior author were deidentified and labeled by the senior author as cholesteatoma, abnormal non-cholesteatoma, or normal. An image classification workflow was developed to automatically differentiate cholesteatomas from other possible tympanic membrane appearances. Eight pretrained CNNs were trained on our otoscopic images, then tested on a withheld subset of images to evaluate their final performance. CNN intermediate activations were also extracted to visualize important image features. Results: A total of 834 otoscopic images were collected, further categorized into 197 cholesteatoma, 457 abnormal non-cholesteatoma, and 180 normal. Final trained CNNs demonstrated strong performance, achieving accuracies of 83.8%-98.5% for differentiating cholesteatoma from normal, 75.6%-90.1% for differentiating cholesteatoma from abnormal non-cholesteatoma, and 87.0%-90.4% for differentiating cholesteatoma from non-cholesteatoma (abnormal non-cholesteatoma + normal). DenseNet201 (100% sensitivity, 97.1% specificity), NASNetLarge (100% sensitivity, 88.2% specificity), and MobileNetV2 (94.1% sensitivity, 100% specificity) were among the best performing CNNs in distinguishing cholesteatoma versus normal. Visualization of intermediate activations showed robust detection of relevant image features by the CNNs. Conclusion: While further refinement and more training images are needed to improve performance, artificial intelligence-driven analysis of otoscopic images shows great promise as a diagnostic tool for detecting cholesteatomas. Level of Evidence: 3.
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.