Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38204896›Full record

ArticleRadiologia brasileira

Application of artificial intelligence in predicting malignancy risk in breast masses on ultrasound.

Mariah Carneiro Wanderley, Cândida Maria Alves Soares, Marina Marcondes Moreira Morais, Rachel Malheiros Cruz, Isadora Ribeiro Monteiro Lima, Rubens Chojniak, Almir Galvão Vieira Bitencourt

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiologia brasileira. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mariah Carneiro WanderleyDepartment of Imaging, A.C.Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-5389-638X
Cândida Maria Alves SoaresDepartment of Imaging, A.C.Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-3957-1217
Marina Marcondes Moreira MoraisDepartment of Imaging, A.C.Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0009-0000-6069-2588
Rachel Malheiros CruzDepartment of Imaging, A.C.Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0009-0000-3926-858X
Isadora Ribeiro Monteiro LimaDepartment of Imaging, A.C.Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0009-0007-6361-0139
Rubens ChojniakDepartment of Imaging, A.C.Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-8096-252X
Almir Galvão Vieira BitencourtDepartment of Imaging, A.C.Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-0192-9885
AC Camargo Hospital · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the results obtained with an artificial intelligence-based software for predicting the risk of malignancy in breast masses from ultrasound images. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective, single-center study evaluating 555 breast masses submitted to percutaneous biopsy at a cancer referral center. Ultrasonographic findings were classified in accordance with the BI-RADS lexicon. The images were analyzed by using Koios DS Breast software and classified as benign, probably benign, low to intermediate suspicion, high suspicion, or probably malignant. The histological classification was considered the reference standard. Results: The mean age of the patients was 51 years, and the mean mass size was 16 mm. The radiologist evaluation had a sensitivity and specificity of 99.1% and 34.0%, respectively, compared with 98.2% and 39.0%, respectively, for the software evaluation. The positive predictive value for malignancy for the BI-RADS categories was similar between the radiologist and software evaluations. Two false-negative results were identified in the radiologist evaluation, the masses in question being classified as suspicious by the software, whereas four false-negative results were identified in the software evaluation, the masses in question being classified as suspicious by the radiologist. Conclusion: In our sample, the performance of artificial intelligence-based software was comparable to that of a radiologist.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceBreast neoplasmsmammaryRisk assessment.Ultrasonography

Identifiers

PMID38204896
PMCPMC10775818
OpenAlexW4389222867

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.