ArticleCureus2024
Development of an Artificial Intelligence Model for the Classification of Gastric Carcinoma Stages Using Pathology Slides.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Global research hotspots and trends in the application of artificial intelligence in gastric cancer: a bibliometric analysis from 2005 to 2024.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence in Gastric Cancer: Diagnostic, Prognostic, and Predictive Developments, Evidence Maturity, and Translational Challenges.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: A Comprehensive Cross-Cancer Translational Readiness Analysis Across 18 Malignancies.Cancers · 2026Review
- Article
- Artificial intelligence for biomarker prediction in gastric cancer: from histopathology to multimodal integration.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in digital pathology - time for a reality check.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence-Based Distinction of Actinic Keratosis and Seborrheic Keratosis.Cureus · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study showcases a novel AI-driven approach to accurately differentiate between stage one and stage two gastric carcinoma based on pathology slide analysis. Gastric carcinoma, a significant contributor to cancer-related mortality globally, necessitates precise staging for optimal treatment planning and patient management. Leveraging a comprehensive dataset of 3540 high-resolution pathology images sourced from Kaggle.com, comprising an equal distribution of stage one and stage two tumors, the developed AI model demonstrates remarkable performance in tumor staging. Through the application of state-of-the-art deep learning techniques on Google's Collaboration platform, the model achieves outstanding accuracy and precision rates of 100%, accompanied by notable sensitivity (97.09%), specificity (100%), and F1-score (98.31%). Additionally, the model exhibits an impressive area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.999, indicating superior discriminatory power and robustness. By providing clinicians with an efficient and reliable tool for gastric carcinoma staging, this AI-driven approach has the potential to significantly enhance diagnostic accuracy, inform treatment decisions, and ultimately improve patient outcomes in the management of gastric carcinoma. This research contributes to the ongoing advancement of cancer diagnosis and underscores the transformative potential of artificial intelligence in clinical practice.
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.