ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
Real-Time Ultrasonography and the Evaluation of Static Images Yield Different Results in the Assessment of EU-TIRADS Categories.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prospective comparison of static versus dynamic images in abdominal ultrasound education - a randomised controlled trial.BMC medical education · 2025Trial
- Interobserver Agreement in Ultrasound Risk Stratification Systems for Thyroid Nodules on Static Images Versus Cine-Loop Video Sequences.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
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
Abstract
The studies on the effectiveness of various TIRADS in the diagnostics of thyroid nodules differ in the method of ultrasound image assessment: real time (rtUS) vs. static ultrasonography (stUS). The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of those two methods on the categorization of nodules in EU-TIRADS. Three experienced raters assessed 842 nodules in routine rtUS and reassessed with the use of sUS. Reproducibility of the assessment of malignancy risk features and categorization of nodules with EU-TIRADS was estimated with Krippendorff's alpha coefficient (Kα). The reproducibility of EU-TIRADS categories on sUS in relation to rtUS was in range 70.9-76.5% for all raters (Kα: 0.60-0.68) with the highest reproducibility for category 3 (80.0-86.5%) and the lowest for category 5 (48.7-77.8%). There was a total disagreement of the identification of microcalcifications on sUS in relation to rtUS, a strongly variable reproducibility of marked hypoechogenicity (12.5-84.6%, Kα: 0.14-0.48) and a tendency toward more frequent identification of the non-oval shape on sUS. The percentage of agreement for each pair of raters in assigning the EU-TIRADS category on sUS was in the range 71.6-72.3% (Kα: 0.60-0.62). The method of sonographic image evaluation influences the nodule's feature assessment and, eventually, the categorization within EU-TIRADS.
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.