Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38992655›Full record

ArticleBMC medicine2024

The clinical value of artificial intelligence in assisting junior radiologists in thyroid ultrasound: a multicenter prospective study from real clinical practice.

Dong Xu, Lin Sui, Chunquan Zhang, Jing Xiong, Vicky Yang Wang, Yahan Zhou, Xinying Zhu, Chen Chen, Yu Zhao, Yiting Xie and 5 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

15 authors.

Dong Xu *Department of Diagnostic Ultrasound Imaging & Interventional Therapy, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Hangzhou Institute of Medicine (HIM), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou, 310022, China.
Lin Sui *Department of Diagnostic Ultrasound Imaging & Interventional Therapy, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Hangzhou Institute of Medicine (HIM), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou, 310022, China.
Chunquan Zhang *Department of Ultrasound, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Jiangxi Medical College, Nanchang University, Nanchang, 330006, China.
Jing Xiong *Institute of Biomedical and Health Engineering, Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, 518055, China.
Vicky Yang WangWenling Institute of Big Data and Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, Taizhou, 317502, China.
Yahan ZhouWenling Institute of Big Data and Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, Taizhou, 317502, China.
Xinying ZhuDepartment of Diagnostic Ultrasound Imaging & Interventional Therapy, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Hangzhou Institute of Medicine (HIM), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou, 310022, China.
Chen ChenDepartment of Diagnostic Ultrasound Imaging & Interventional Therapy, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Hangzhou Institute of Medicine (HIM), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou, 310022, China.
Yu ZhaoDepartment of Ultrasound, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Jiangxi Medical College, Nanchang University, Nanchang, 330006, China.
Yiting XieDemetics Medical Technology Co. Ltd., Hangzhou, 310022, China.
Weizhen KongDepartment of Mathematics, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, 999077, China.
Jincao YaoDepartment of Diagnostic Ultrasound Imaging & Interventional Therapy, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Hangzhou Institute of Medicine (HIM), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou, 310022, China.
Lei XuZhejiang Qiushi Institute for Mathematical Medicine, Hangzhou, 310022, China. lei.xu@ki.se.ORCID 0000-0002-1165-6246
Yuxia ZhaiThe Second Affiliated Hospital of Shantou University Medical College, Guangdong, 515041, China. zhyx6365@163.com.
Liping WangDepartment of Diagnostic Ultrasound Imaging & Interventional Therapy, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Hangzhou Institute of Medicine (HIM), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou, 310022, China. wanglp@zjcc.org.cn.

Funding

National Key Research and Development Program of China 2022YFF0608403National Natural Science Foundation of China No. 82071946Research Program of National Health Commision Capacity Building and Continuing Education Center CSJRZC2021JJSJ001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study is to propose a clinically applicable 2-echelon (2e) diagnostic criteria for the analysis of thyroid nodules such that low-risk nodules are screened off while only suspicious or indeterminate ones are further examined by histopathology, and to explore whether artificial intelligence (AI) can provide precise assistance for clinical decision-making in the real-world prospective scenario.

methodsIn this prospective study, we enrolled 1036 patients with a total of 2296 thyroid nodules from three medical centers. The diagnostic performance of the AI system, radiologists with different levels of experience, and AI-assisted radiologists with different levels of experience in diagnosing thyroid nodules were evaluated against our proposed 2e diagnostic criteria, with the first being an arbitration committee consisting of 3 senior specialists and the second being cyto- or histopathology.

resultsAccording to the 2e diagnostic criteria, 1543 nodules were classified by the arbitration committee, and the benign and malignant nature of 753 nodules was determined by pathological examinations. Taking pathological results as the evaluation standard, the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of the AI systems were 0.826, 0.815, 0.821, and 0.821. For those cases where diagnosis by the Arbitration Committee were taken as the evaluation standard, the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and AUC of the AI system were 0.946, 0.966, 0.964, and 0.956. Taking the global 2e diagnostic criteria as the gold standard, the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and AUC of the AI system were 0.868, 0.934, 0.917, and 0.901, respectively. Under different criteria, AI was comparable to the diagnostic performance of senior radiologists and outperformed junior radiologists (all P < 0.05). Furthermore, AI assistance significantly improved the performance of junior radiologists in the diagnosis of thyroid nodules, and their diagnostic performance was comparable to that of senior radiologists when pathological results were taken as the gold standard (all p > 0.05).

conclusionsThe proposed 2e diagnostic criteria are consistent with real-world clinical evaluations and affirm the applicability of the AI system. Under the 2e criteria, the diagnostic performance of the AI system is comparable to that of senior radiologists and significantly improves the diagnostic capabilities of junior radiologists. This has the potential to reduce unnecessary invasive diagnostic procedures in real-world clinical practice.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceThyroid NoduleUltrasonographyAdolescentAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRadiologistsSensitivity and SpecificityThyroid GlandYoung AdultArtificial intelligenceDiagnosis criteriaThyroid noduleUltrasound

Identifiers

PMID38992655
PMCPMC11241898

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.