SynthesisWorld journal of urology2024
Artificial intelligence in urolithiasis: a systematic review of utilization and effectiveness.
Synthesis in World journal of urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contemporary practice patterns of shock wave lithotripsy in the era of endourology: an international FUTURE survey.Urolithiasis · 2026Article
- Investigation of the multifactorial regulatory mechanisms underlying compositional changes in recurrent urinary stones and development of a machine learning-based personalized predictive model.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Pediatric ureteral stenting: state-of-the-art review.World journal of urology · 2026Review
- Knowledge, attitudes and practices towards urinary calculi among patients: a cross-sectional study in Jiangsu Province, China.BMJ open · 2026Article
- The role of artificial intelligence in advancing urologic care: From diagnostics to therapeutics.Surgery in practice and science · 2026Review
- The Application of Nanomaterials in Kidney Stone Disease: Emerging Strategies for Early Diagnosis, Targeted Therapy, and Prevention.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- Development and multi-institutional validation of the Swin transformer model for prediction of spontaneous passage of ureteral calculi: A retrospective multicentric study.Urolithiasis · 2025Article
- Use of Artificial Intelligence in Vesicoureteral Reflux Disease: A Comparative Study of Guideline Compliance.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Predictive value of the stone-free rate after percutaneous nephrolithotomy based on multiple machine learning models.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Awareness, use, and perceived barriers to artificial intelligence in pediatric urology: a multicenter survey.Therapeutic advances in urologyArticle
- 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMirroring global trends, artificial intelligence advances in medicine, notably urolithiasis. It promises accurate diagnoses, effective treatments, and forecasting epidemiological risks and stone passage. This systematic review aims to identify the types of AI models utilised in urolithiasis studies and evaluate their effectiveness.
methodsThe study was registered with PROSPERO. Pubmed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant literature, using keywords such as 'urology,' 'artificial intelligence,' and 'machine learning.' Only original AI studies on urolithiasis were included, excluding reviews, unrelated studies, and non-English articles. PRISMA guidelines followed.
resultsOut of 4851 studies initially identified, 71 were included for comprehensive analysis in the application of AI in urolithiasis. AI showed notable proficiency in stone composition analysis in 12 studies, achieving an average precision of 88.2% (Range 0.65-1). In the domain of stone detection, the average precision remarkably reached 96.9%. AI's accuracy rate in predicting spontaneous ureteral stone passage averaged 87%, while its performance in treatment modalities such as PCNL and SWL achieved average accuracy rates of 82% and 83%, respectively. These AI models were generally superior to traditional diagnostic and treatment methods.
conclusionThe consolidated data underscores AI's increasing significance in urolithiasis management. Across various dimensions-diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment-AI outperformed conventional methodologies. High precision and accuracy rates indicate that AI is not only effective but also poised for integration into routine clinical practice. Further research is warranted to establish AI's long-term utility and to validate its role as a standard tool in urological care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39417840What 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.