ArticleOtolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery2025
Digital Otoscopy With Computer-Aided Composite Image Generation: Impact on the Correct Diagnosis, Confidence, and Time.
Article in Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- LUCID: Intelligent Informative Frame Selection in Otoscopy for Enhanced Diagnostic Utility.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study investigated the comparative performance of ear, nose, and throat (ENT) physicians in correctly detecting ear abnormalities when reviewing digital otoscopy imaging using 3 different visualization methods, including computer-assisted composite images called "SelectStitch," single video frame "Still" images, and video clips. The study also explored clinicians' diagnostic confidence levels and the time to make a diagnosis. STUDY
designClinician diagnostic reader study.
settingOnline diagnostic survey of ENT physicians.
methodsNine ENT physicians reviewed digital otoscopy examinations from 86 ears with various diagnoses (normal, perforation, retraction, middle ear effusion, tympanosclerosis). Otoscopy examinations used artificial-intelligence (AI)-based computer-aided composite image generation from a video clip (SelectStitch), manually selected best still frame from a video clip (Still), or the entire video clip. Statistical analyses included comparisons of ability to detect correct diagnosis, confidence levels, and diagnosis times.
resultsThe ENT physicians' ability to detect ear abnormalities (33.2%-68.7%) varied depending on the pathologies. SelectStitch and Still images were not statistically different in detecting abnormalities (P > .50), but both were different from Video (P < .01). However, the performance improvement observed with Videos came at the cost of significantly longer time to determining the diagnosis. The level of confidence in the diagnosis was positively associated with correct diagnoses, but varied by particular pathology.
conclusionThis study explores the potential of computer-assisted techniques like SelectStitch in enhancing otoscopic diagnoses and time-saving, which could benefit telemedicine settings. Comparable performance between computer-generated and manually selected images suggests the potential of AI algorithms for otoscopy applications.
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.