Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38049809›Full record

SynthesisBiomedical engineering online2023

Diagnostic test accuracy of machine learning algorithms for the detection intracranial hemorrhage: a systematic review and meta-analysis study.

Masoud Maghami, Shahab Aldin Sattari, Marziyeh Tahmasbi, Pegah Panahi, Javad Mozafari, Kiarash Shirbandi

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Biomedical engineering online, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Masoud MaghamiMedical Doctor (MD), School of Medicine, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.
Shahab Aldin SattariDepartment of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Marziyeh TahmasbiDepartment of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.
Pegah PanahiMedical Doctor (MD), School of Medicine, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.
Javad MozafariDepartment of Emergency Medicine, School of Medicine, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.
Kiarash ShirbandiIndependent Medical Imaging Researcher, Tehran, Iran. Shirbandi.k@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1055-6606
Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences · IRIran University of Medical Sciences · IRJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to objectively evaluate the evidence of machine learning (ML) in the patient diagnosis of Intracranial Hemorrhage (ICH) on computed tomography (CT) scans.

methodsUntil May 2023, systematic searches were conducted in ISI Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, IEEE Xplore Digital Library, CINAHL, Science Direct, PROSPERO, and EMBASE for studies that evaluated the diagnostic precision of ML model-assisted ICH detection. Patients with and without ICH as the target condition who were receiving CT-Scan were eligible for the research, which used ML algorithms based on radiologists' reports as the gold reference standard. For meta-analysis, pooled sensitivities, specificities, and a summary receiver operating characteristics curve (SROC) were used.

resultsAt last, after screening the title, abstract, and full paper, twenty-six retrospective and three prospective, and two retrospective/prospective studies were included. The overall (Diagnostic Test Accuracy) DTA of retrospective studies with a pooled sensitivity was 0.917 (95% CI 0.88-0.943, I

conclusionThis meta-analysis on DTA of ML algorithms for detecting ICH by assessing non-contrast CT-Scans shows the ML has an acceptable performance in diagnosing ICH. Using ResNet in ICH detection remains promising prediction was improved via training in an Architecture Learning Network (ALN).

Indexed as

AlgorithmsMachine LearningDiagnostic Tests, RoutineHumansProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityArtificial intelligenceBrain diseasesCerebrovascular disordersDeep learningIntracranial hemorrhagesMachine learningMeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID38049809
PMCPMC10694901
OpenAlexW4389308331

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.