ReviewFrontiers in oncology2024
The diagnostic performance of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis: Simple Rules for diagnosing ovarian tumors-a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Have Iota Simple Rules the Same Diagnostic Performance When Used by Nonexpert Examiners as Compared to Expert Examiners? Systematic Review and Meta-Analisis.Journal of clinical ultrasound : JCU · 2026Pooled it
- Bilateral ovarian serous cystadenocarcinoma with peritoneal dissemination and a coexisting cervical mass: A diagnostic dilemma.Radiology case reports · 2026Article
- Two-staged CT-based radiomics model in characterising early-stage ovarian carcinoma and benign ovarian masses.Journal of ovarian research · 2026Article
- International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Scoring and Its Histopathological Correlation: A Diagnostic Accuracy Study.Cureus · 2026Article
- A Simple O-RADS-Based Ultrasound Scoring System for Risk Stratification of Ovarian Cystic Lesions: A Multicenter Study.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Comparative Ultrasonographic Evaluation of Morphology and Vascularization in Endometriomas and Ovarian Mature Cystic Teratomas.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Ovarian Cystadenofibroma: An Overview.Cureus · 2025Article
- Early-fusion hybrid CNN-transformer models for multiclass ovarian tumor ultrasound classification.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Adnexal masses are a common health issue in gynecology; the challenge lies in the differential diagnosis of these masses. The International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Simple Rules (IOTA-SR) offers the first scoring system to aid in diagnosis. It is based on a set of five ultrasound imaging features indicative of a malignant ovarian tumor and five features indicative of a benign tumor. This review aims to assess the diagnostic performance of IOTA-SR for classifying ovarian tumors as benign or malignant. Methods: A systematic review was conducted on MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science. The terminologies "IOTA-SR", "adnexal, mass", and "ovarian tumors scoring" were employed. Twenty-seven research articles conducted from 2008 to 2022 were included in the meta-analysis; the publication outcome indicates that performance quality tests were extracted directly or indirectly, including true positive (TP), false positive (FP), true negative (TN), and false negative (FN). The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) was used to evaluate the study quality and estimate the risk of bias. After estimating the pooled effect of the sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was estimated using the bivariate random effects model. Utilizing Cochran's Q statistics and Higgins's inconsistency test through the I Results: Among 27 studies, including 7,841 adnexal masses, the results of this meta-analysis showed excellent diagnostic performance with a pooled sensitivity of 92% [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.89-0.94] and a pooled specificity of 92% (95% CI, 0.89-0.94). The IOTA-SR was applicable in 85.7% of adnexal masses. Conclusion: The IOTA-SR is highly effective in the presurgical differentiation of malignant versus benign adnexal masses when applied by an expert ultrasonography operator.
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.