Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38957322›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2024

Application of CT and MRI images based on artificial intelligence to predict lymph node metastases in patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma: a subgroup meta-analysis.

Cheng Deng, Jun Hu, Ping Tang, Tao Xu, Ling He, Zesheng Zeng, Jianfeng Sheng

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Warning people about the risk of AI error mitigates human acquisition of AI bias.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Alterations inCancers · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
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.

Cheng DengDepartment of Thyroid, Head, Neck and Maxillofacial Surgery, the Third Hospital of Mianyang & Sichuan Mental Health Center, Mianyang, Sichuan, China.
Jun HuDepartment of Thyroid, Head, Neck and Maxillofacial Surgery, the Third Hospital of Mianyang & Sichuan Mental Health Center, Mianyang, Sichuan, China.
Ping TangDepartment of Thyroid, Head, Neck and Maxillofacial Surgery, the Third Hospital of Mianyang & Sichuan Mental Health Center, Mianyang, Sichuan, China.
Tao XuDepartment of Thyroid, Head, Neck and Maxillofacial Surgery, the Third Hospital of Mianyang & Sichuan Mental Health Center, Mianyang, Sichuan, China.
Ling HeDepartment of Thyroid, Head, Neck and Maxillofacial Surgery, the Third Hospital of Mianyang & Sichuan Mental Health Center, Mianyang, Sichuan, China.
Zesheng ZengDepartment of Thyroid, Head, Neck and Maxillofacial Surgery, the Third Hospital of Mianyang & Sichuan Mental Health Center, Mianyang, Sichuan, China.
Jianfeng ShengDepartment of Thyroid, Head, Neck and Maxillofacial Surgery, the Third Hospital of Mianyang & Sichuan Mental Health Center, Mianyang, Sichuan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The performance of artificial intelligence (AI) in the prediction of lymph node (LN) metastasis in patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) has not been quantitatively evaluated. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of published data on the diagnostic performance of CT and MRI based on AI algorithms for predicting LN metastases in patients with OSCC. Methods: We searched the Embase, PubMed (Medline), Web of Science, and Cochrane databases for studies on the use of AI in predicting LN metastasis in OSCC. Binary diagnostic accuracy data were extracted to obtain the outcomes of interest, namely, the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity, and compared the diagnostic performance of AI with that of radiologists. Subgroup analyses were performed with regard to different types of AI algorithms and imaging modalities. Results: Fourteen eligible studies were included in the meta-analysis. The AUC, sensitivity, and specificity of the AI models for the diagnosis of LN metastases were 0.92 (95% CI 0.89-0.94), 0.79 (95% CI 0.72-0.85), and 0.90 (95% CI 0.86-0.93), respectively. Promising diagnostic performance was observed in the subgroup analyses based on algorithm types [machine learning (ML) or deep learning (DL)] and imaging modalities (CT vs. MRI). The pooled diagnostic performance of AI was significantly better than that of experienced radiologists. Discussion: In conclusion, AI based on CT and MRI imaging has good diagnostic accuracy in predicting LN metastasis in patients with OSCC and thus has the potential for clinical application. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, PROSPERO (No. CRD42024506159).

Indexed as

artificial intelligencedeep learninglymph node metastasismeta-analysisoral squamous cell carcinomaradiomics

Identifiers

PMID38957322
PMCPMC11217320

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.