Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38074784›Full record

ArticleRadiology. Artificial intelligence2023

Use of a Deep Learning Algorithm for Detection and Triage of Cancer-associated Incidental Pulmonary Embolism.

Peder Wiklund, Koshiar Medson

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiology. Artificial intelligence, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.2field-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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Peder WiklundFrom the Department of Radiology, Region Halland, Lasarettsvägen 6, 30233 Halmstad, Sweden (P.W.); Department of Radiology and Functional Imaging, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden (K.M.); and Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden (K.M.).ORCID 0000-0002-4437-5686
Koshiar MedsonFrom the Department of Radiology, Region Halland, Lasarettsvägen 6, 30233 Halmstad, Sweden (P.W.); Department of Radiology and Functional Imaging, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden (K.M.); and Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden (K.M.).ORCID 0000-0002-9209-7801
Karolinska University Hospital · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Incidental pulmonary embolism (iPE) is a common complication in patients with cancer, and there is often a delay in reporting these studies and a delay between the finalized report and time to treatment. In addition, unreported iPE is common. This retrospective single-center cross-sectional study evaluated the effect of an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm on the report turnaround time, time to treatment, and detection rate in patients with cancer-associated iPE. Adult patients with cancer were included either before (July 1, 2018, to June 30, 2019) or after (November 1, 2020, to April 30, 2021) implementation of an AI algorithm for iPE detection and triage. The results demonstrated that reported iPE prevalence was significantly higher in the period after AI implementation (2.5% [26 of 1036 studies] vs 0.8% [16 of 1892 studies],

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceCancerCancer-associated Incidental Pulmonary EmbolismCT ImagingPulmonary Embolism

Identifiers

PMID38074784
PMCPMC10698599
OpenAlexW4387743770

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.