ArticleDiseases (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Integrating Machine Learning in Clinical Practice for Characterizing the Malignancy of Solitary Pulmonary Nodules in PET/CT Screening.
Article in Diseases (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Incidence and risk factors for malignancy in patients with incidental solitary pulmonary nodules: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Between Two Worlds: Investigating the Intersection of Human Expertise and Machine Learning in the Case of Coronary Artery Disease Diagnosis.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The study investigates the efficiency of integrating Machine Learning (ML) in clinical practice for diagnosing solitary pulmonary nodules' (SPN) malignancy. Patient data had been recorded in the Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital of Patras, in Greece. A dataset comprising 456 SPN characteristics extracted from CT scans, the SUVmax score from the PET examination, and the ultimate outcome (benign/malignant), determined by patient follow-up or biopsy, was used to build the ML classifier. Two medical experts provided their malignancy likelihood scores, taking into account the patient's clinical condition and without prior knowledge of the true label of the SPN. Incorporating human assessments into ML model training improved diagnostic efficiency by approximately 3%, highlighting the synergistic role of human judgment alongside ML. Under the latter setup, the ML model had an accuracy score of 95.39% (CI 95%: 95.29-95.49%). While ML exhibited swings in probability scores, human readers excelled in discerning ambiguous cases. ML outperformed the best human reader in challenging instances, particularly in SPNs with ambiguous probability grades, showcasing its utility in diagnostic grey zones. The best human reader reached an accuracy of 80% in the grey zone, whilst ML exhibited 89%. The findings underline the collaborative potential of ML and human expertise in enhancing SPN characterization accuracy and confidence, especially in cases where diagnostic certainty is elusive. This study contributes to understanding how integrating ML and human judgement can optimize SPN diagnostic outcomes, ultimately advancing clinical decision-making in PET/CT screenings.
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.