ArticleJournal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine2025
Inter-Reader Agreement for Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System Major Features and Final Categorization: A Subanalysis From a Prospective Multicenter Study.
Article in Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine, 2025. 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesContrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) is used to definitively diagnose hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients at risk. However, the user variability associated with CEUS LI-RADS has not been validated in North American and European patients. This study aims to evaluate the inter-reader agreements of CEUS LI-RADS features for, and final categorization of, HCC in patients at risk.
methodsThis retrospective multicenter clinical study used the database of a previous prospective multinational study, evaluating the accuracy of CEUS LI-RADS for HCC diagnosis in patients at risk. All cases were first evaluated by a site physician performing/supervising the CEUS examination. Randomly selected cases were re-evaluated by a blinded central reader. Final diagnosis was confirmed with the reference standard, which was a composite of imaging tests and histology. Cohen's kappa test was used to evaluate inter-reader agreement.
resultsThis study included 150 liver nodules and 58.0% (87/150) were confirmed as HCC, 4.7% (7/150) non-HCC malignancies, 22.7% (34/150) had no confirmed final diagnosis, and 14.7% (22/150) were nonmalignant. Inter-reader agreements were substantial for CEUS LI-RADS categorization (κ = 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.51-0.71) and major features assessment (ranged κ = 0.64-0.78), LR-5 (κ = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.52-0.77), and LR-M (κ = 0.67; 95% CI: 0.44-0.90), while for LR-1 and LR-2 categorization was almost perfect (κ = 0.85; 95% CI: 0.65-1.00).
conclusionOur study reported a substantial inter-reader agreement for overall CEUS LI-RADS categorization, especially for LR-5 and LR-M, and major imaging features of HCC, further confirming CEUS LI-RADS as a valuable and reliable tool for diagnosis of HCC.
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.