ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2023
Image-Based Artificial Intelligence Technology for Diagnosing Middle Ear Diseases: A Systematic Review.
Review 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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deep Learning-Based Semantic Segmentation and Classification of Otoscopic Images for Otitis Media Diagnosis and Health Promotion.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Current and Future Trends in Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence in clinical medicine: a state-of-the-art overview of systematic reviews with methodological recommendations for improved reporting.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Review
- Review
- Developments in Image Processing Using Deep Learning and Reinforcement Learning.Journal of imaging · 2023Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Otolaryngological diagnoses, such as otitis media, are traditionally performed using endoscopy, wherein diagnostic accuracy can be subjective and vary among clinicians. The integration of objective tools, like artificial intelligence (AI), could potentially improve the diagnostic process by minimizing the influence of subjective biases and variability. We systematically reviewed the AI techniques using medical imaging in otolaryngology. Relevant studies related to AI-assisted otitis media diagnosis were extracted from five databases: Google Scholar, PubMed, Medline, Embase, and IEEE Xplore, without date restrictions. Publications that did not relate to AI and otitis media diagnosis or did not utilize medical imaging were excluded. Of the 32identified studies, 26 used tympanic membrane images for classification, achieving an average diagnosis accuracy of 86% (range: 48.7-99.16%). Another three studies employed both segmentation and classification techniques, reporting an average diagnosis accuracy of 90.8% (range: 88.06-93.9%). These findings suggest that AI technologies hold promise for improving otitis media diagnosis, offering benefits for telemedicine and primary care settings due to their high diagnostic accuracy. However, to ensure patient safety and optimal outcomes, further improvements in diagnostic performance are necessary.
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.