ArticleTherapeutics and clinical risk management2024
Comparative Analysis of AI-SONICTM Thyroid System and Six Thyroid Risk Stratification Guidelines in Papillary Thyroid Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Aim: The study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of AI-SONICTM Thyroid System (AI-SONICTM) with six thyroid nodule ultrasound risk stratification systems, as well as the interobserver agreement among different-year ultrasound examiners using the same diagnostic approach. Methods: This retrospective study included patients who underwent thyroid ultrasound examination and surgery between 2010 and 2022. Three ultrasound examiners with 2, 5, and 10 years of experience, respectively, used AI-SONICTM and six guidelines to risk-stratify the nodules. The diagnostic performance and interobserver agreement were assessed. Results: A total of 370 thyroid nodules were included, including 195 papillary thyroid carcinomas (PTC) and 175 benign nodules. For physicians of varying seniority from low to high, AI-SONICTM had a moderate sensitivities of 82.56%, 83.08%, 84.62%, respectively, while AACE/ACE/AME had the highest diagnostic sensitivities (96.41%, 95.38%, 96.41%, respectively); And relatively higher specificities were 85.14%, 85.71%, 85.71% for KSThR, while moderate specificities with values of 84.0%, 85.14%, and 85.71%, respectively were found for AI-SONICTM; The accuracy was highest for ATA (excluding non-classifiable nodules), with values of 87.26%, 87.93%, and 88.82%, respectively, while the accuracy for AI-SONICTM were 83.24%, 84.05%, and 85.14%, respectively. The Kendall's tau coefficient indicated strong or moderate interobserver agreement among all examiners using different diagnostic methods (Kendall's tau coefficient >0.6, P<0.001). AI-SONICTM showed the highest interobserver agreement (Kendall's tau coefficient=0.995, P<0.001). A binary probit regression analysis showed that nodules with cystic components had a significantly higher regression coefficient value of 0.983 (P=0.002), indicating that AI-SONICTM may have higher accuracy for nodules with cystic components. Conclusion: AI-SONICTM and the six thyroid nodule ultrasound risk stratification systems showed high diagnostic performance for papillary thyroid carcinoma. All examiners showed strong or moderate interobserver agreement when using different diagnostic methods. AI-SONICTM may have higher accuracy for nodules with cystic components.
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.