Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37461083›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2023

Use of artificial intelligence in discerning the need for prostate biopsy and readiness for clinical practice: a systematic review protocol.

Elisa Martinez-Marroquin, Minh Chau, Murray Turner, Hodo Haxhimolla, Catherine Paterson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Elisa Martinez-MarroquinFaculty of Science and Technology, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, 2617, Australia. elisa.martinez-marroquin@canberra.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0003-0867-7908
Minh ChauPrehabilitation, Activity, Cancer, Exercise and Survivorship (PACES) Research Group, Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, 2617, Australia.
Murray TurnerPrehabilitation, Activity, Cancer, Exercise and Survivorship (PACES) Research Group, Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, 2617, Australia.
Hodo HaxhimollaPrehabilitation, Activity, Cancer, Exercise and Survivorship (PACES) Research Group, Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, 2617, Australia.
Catherine PatersonPrehabilitation, Activity, Cancer, Exercise and Survivorship (PACES) Research Group, Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, 2617, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVariability and inaccuracies in the diagnosis of prostate cancer, and the risk of complications from invasive tests, have been extensively reported in the research literature. To address this, the use of artificial intelligence (AI) has been attracting increased interest in recent years to improve the diagnostic accuracy and objectivity. Although AI literature has reported promising results, further research is needed on the identification of evidence gaps that limit the potential adoption in prostate cancer screening practice.

methodsA systematic electronic search strategy will be used to identify peer-reviewed articles published from inception to the date of searches and indexed in CINAHL, IEEE Xplore, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection databases. Registries including Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) will be searched for unpublished studies, and experts were invited to provide suitable references. The research and reporting will be based on Cochrane recommendations and PRISMA guidelines, respectively. The screening and quality assessment of the articles will be conducted by two of the authors independently, and conflicts will be resolved by a third author. DISCUSSION: This systematic review will summarise the use of AI techniques to predict the need for prostate biopsy based on clinical and demographic indicators, including its diagnostic accuracy and readiness for adoption in clinical practice. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022336540.

Indexed as

ProstateProstatic NeoplasmsArtificial IntelligenceBiopsyEarly Detection of CancerHumansMaleProstate-Specific AntigenSystematic Reviews as TopicProstate-Specific AntigenAI adoption readinessArtificial intelligenceDiagnosisDiagnostic pathwayProstate cancerSystematic review protocolTechnology maturity level

Identifiers

PMID37461083
PMCPMC10353135

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.