ArticlePloS one2024
Artificial intelligence-based pulmonary embolism classification: Development and validation using real-world data.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Lesion feature enhancement and boundary-aware fusion for pulmonary embolism recognition on CT images.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Developing a novel deep learning-based model for automatic right ventricular parameters assessment on ctpa in pulmonary embolism.Emergency radiology · 2025Article
- Limitations and Future Perspectives on Pulmonary Embolism: So Far, So Good.Interventional cardiology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Pilot deployment of a cloud-based universal medical image repository in a large public health system: A protocol study.PloS one · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper presents an artificial intelligence-based classification model for the detection of pulmonary embolism in computed tomography angiography. The proposed model, developed from public data and validated on a large dataset from a tertiary hospital, uses a two-dimensional approach that integrates temporal series to classify each slice of the examination and make predictions at both slice and examination levels. The training process consists of two stages: first using a convolutional neural network InceptionResNet V2 and then a recurrent neural network long short-term memory model. This approach achieved an accuracy of 93% at the slice level and 77% at the examination level. External validation using a hospital dataset resulted in a precision of 86% for positive pulmonary embolism cases and 69% for negative pulmonary embolism cases. Notably, the model excels in excluding pulmonary embolism, achieving a precision of 73% and a recall of 82%, emphasizing its clinical value in reducing unnecessary interventions. In addition, the diverse demographic distribution in the validation dataset strengthens the model's generalizability. Overall, this model offers promising potential for accurate detection and exclusion of pulmonary embolism, potentially streamlining diagnosis and improving patient outcomes.
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.