ReviewCureus2024
Use of Artificial Intelligence in the Diagnosis of Colorectal Cancer.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence in colorectal cancer multidisciplinary decision-making: concordance, predictive support and clinical translation.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Fully Automatic Artificial Intelligence Liver Anatomy Segmentation in the Management of Colorectal Liver Metastases.Cureus · 2025Article
- Risk factors, prevention and screening of colorectal cancer: A rising problem.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- A Narrative Review on the Role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Colorectal Cancer Management.Cureus · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common forms of cancer. Therefore, diagnosing the condition early and accurately is critical for improved patient outcomes and effective treatment. Recently, artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms such as support vector machine (SVM) and convolutional neural network (CNN) have demonstrated promise in medical image analysis. This paper, conducted from a systematic review perspective, aimed to determine the effectiveness of AI integration in CRC diagnosis, emphasizing accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. From a methodological perspective, articles that were included were those that had been conducted in the past decade. Also, the articles needed to have been documented in English, with databases such as Embase, PubMed, and Google Scholar used to obtain relevant research studies. Similarly, keywords were used to arrive at relevant articles. These keywords included AI, CRC, specificity, sensitivity, accuracy, efficacy, effectiveness, disease diagnosis, screening, machine learning, area under the curve (AUC), and deep learning. From the results, most scholarly studies contend that AI is superior in medical image analysis, the development of subtle patterns, and decision support. However, while deploying these algorithms, a key theme is that the collaboration between medical experts and AI systems needs to be seamless. In addition, the AI algorithms ought to be refined continuously in the current world of big data and ensure that they undergo rigorous validation to provide more informed decision-making for or against adopting those AI tools in clinical settings. In conclusion, therefore, balancing between human expertise and technological innovation is likely to pave the way for the realization of AI's full potential concerning its promising role in improving CRC diagnosis, upon which there might be significant patient outcome improvements, disease detection, and the achievement of a more effective healthcare system.
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.