ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Comparison of Ultrasound Scores in Differentiating between Benign and Malignant Adnexal Masses.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Have Iota Simple Rules the Same Diagnostic Performance When Used by Nonexpert Examiners as Compared to Expert Examiners? Systematic Review and Meta-Analisis.Journal of clinical ultrasound : JCU · 2026Pooled it
- Comparison of the Diagnostic Performance of Ovarian Adnexal Reporting Data System (O-RADS) With IOTA Simple Rules and ADNEX Model for Classifying Adnexal Masses: A Head-To-Head Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical ultrasound : JCU · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of O-RADS with the ADNEX model and IOTA SR for risk stratification of adnexal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Comparing and combining O-RADS ultrasound, serum CA125, and HE4 for the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors.BMC medical imaging · 2026Article
- Contrast-enhanced ultrasound and Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System ultrasound classification for risk assessment of ovarian and adnexal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Review
- Can transabdominal shear wave elastography play a role in solving the dilemma of complex cystic and solid ovarian tumors by ultrasound?Journal of ultrasound · 2025Article
- ECO-SCORE: Development of a New Ultrasound Score for the Study of Cystic and Solid-Cystic Adnexal Masses Based on Imaging Characteristics.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Review
- Utility of a Multi-Marker Panel with Ultrasound for Enhanced Classification of Adnexal Mass.Cancers · 2024Article
- ReClassification of Patients with Ambiguous CA125 for Optimised Pre-Surgical Triage.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- ADNEX risk prediction model for diagnosis of ovarian cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of external validation studies.BMJ medicine · 2024Article
- Comparison of the diagnostic efficiency between the O-RADS US risk stratification system and doctors' subjective judgment.BMC medical imaging · 2023Article
- Clinical value of quantitative analysis of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant pelvic tumors.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Application of Ultrasound Scores (Subjective Assessment, Simple Rules Risk Assessment, ADNEX Model, O-RADS) to Adnexal Masses of Difficult Classification.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Ultrasound Features and Ultrasound Scores in the Differentiation between Benign and Malignant Adnexal Masses.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Subjective ultrasound assessment by an expert examiner is meant to be the best option for the differentiation between benign and malignant adnexal masses. Different ultrasound scores can help in the classification, but whether one of them is significantly better than others is still a matter of debate. The main aim of this work is to compare the diagnostic performance of some of these scores in the evaluation of adnexal masses in the same set of patients. This is a retrospective study of a consecutive series of women diagnosed as having a persistent adnexal mass and managed surgically. Ultrasound characteristics were analyzed according to IOTA criteria. Masses were classified according to the subjective impression of the sonographer and other ultrasound scores (IOTA simple rules -SR-, IOTA simple rules risk assessment -SRRA-, O-RADS classification, and ADNEX model -with and without CA125 value-). A total of 122 women were included. Sixty-two women were postmenopausal (50.8%). Eighty-one women had a benign mass (66.4%), and 41 (33.6%) had a malignant tumor. The sensitivity of subjective assessment, IOTA SR, IOTA SRRA, and ADNEX model with or without CA125 and O-RADS was 87.8%, 66.7%, 78.1%, 95.1%, 87.8%, and 90.2%, respectively. The specificity for these approaches was 69.1%, 89.2%, 72.8%, 74.1%, 67.9%, and 60.5%, respectively. All methods with similar AUC (0.81, 0.78, 0.80, 0.88, 0.84, and 0.75, respectively). We concluded that IOTA SR, IOTA SRRA, and ADNEX models with or without CA125 and O-RADS can help in the differentiation of benign and malignant masses, and their performance is similar to the subjective assessment of an experienced sonographer.
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.