ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
The Diagnostic Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence in Radiological Markers of Normal-Pressure Hydrocephalus (NPH) on Non-Contrast CT Scans of the Brain.
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 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Automatic coarse-to-fine AC-PC localization on CT using registration-guided 3D-UNets.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2026Article
- Utilizing Artificial Intelligence for CSF Segmentation and Analysis in Head CT Imaging: A Systematic Review.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of Cervical Cancer Screening and Treatment in Western Romania.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diagnosing normal-pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) via non-contrast computed tomography (CT) brain scans is presently a formidable task due to the lack of universally agreed-upon standards for radiographic parameter measurement. A variety of radiological parameters, such as Evans' index, narrow sulci at high parietal convexity, Sylvian fissures' dilation, focally enlarged sulci, and more, are currently measured by radiologists. This study aimed to enhance NPH diagnosis by comparing the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of radiological parameters, as evaluated by radiologists and AI methods, utilizing cerebrospinal fluid volumetry. Results revealed a sensitivity of 77.14% for radiologists and 99.05% for AI, with specificities of 98.21% and 57.14%, respectively, in diagnosing NPH. Radiologists demonstrated NPV, PPV, and an accuracy of 82.09%, 97.59%, and 88.02%, while AI reported 98.46%, 68.42%, and 77.42%, respectively. ROC curves exhibited an area under the curve of 0.954 for radiologists and 0.784 for AI, signifying the diagnostic index for NPH. In conclusion, although radiologists exhibited superior sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in diagnosing NPH, AI served as an effective initial screening mechanism for potential NPH cases, potentially easing the radiologists' burden. Given the ongoing AI advancements, it is plausible that AI could eventually match or exceed radiologists' diagnostic prowess in identifying hydrocephalus.
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.