ArticlePloS one2025
Diagnostic of fatty liver using radiomics and deep learning models on non-contrast abdominal CT.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
- Assessment of the Diagnostic Performance and Clinical Impact of AI in Hepatic Steatosis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Radiomics and anaesthetic planning: Quantitative imaging as a new frontier in preoperative risk assessment.World journal of radiology · 2026Review
- Role of systemic and epicardial adipose tissue in cardiometabolic disease.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2026Review
- Transformer-enhanced deep ensemble for multi-class liver disease classification using computed tomography images.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Interpretable Machine Learning Models for Early Detection of Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease Using Non-Invasive Routine Clinical and Laboratory Data.International journal of general medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- [Research progress and future prospects for artificial intelligence in the diagnosis and treatment of fatty liver disease].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2025Review
- CT-Based Radiomic Models in Biopsy-Proven Liver Fibrosis Staging: Direct Comparison of Segmentation Types and Organ Inclusion.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aims to explore the potential of non-contrast abdominal CT radiomics and deep learning models in accurately diagnosing fatty liver. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study retrospectively enrolled 840 individuals who underwent non-contrast abdominal CT and quantitative CT (QCT) examinations at the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University from July 2022 to May 2023. Subsequently, these participants were divided into a training set (n = 539) and a testing set (n = 301) in a 9:5 ratio. The liver fat content measured by experienced radiologists using QCT technology served as the reference standard. The liver images from the non-contrast abdominal CT scans were then segmented as regions of interest (ROI) from which radiomics features were extracted. Two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) radiomics models, as well as 2D and 3D deep learning models, were developed, and machine learning models based on clinical data were constructed for the four-category diagnosis of fatty liver. The characteristic curves for each model were plotted, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were calculated to assess their efficacy in the classification and diagnosis of fatty liver.
resultsA total of 840 participants were included (mean age 49.1 years ± 11.5 years [SD]; 581 males), of whom 610 (73%) had fatty liver. Among the patients with fatty liver, there were 302 with mild fatty liver (CT fat fraction of 5%-14%), 155 with moderate fatty liver (CT fat fraction of 14%-28%), and 153 with severe fatty liver (CT fat fraction >28%). Among all models used for diagnosing fatty liver, the 2D radiomics model based on the random forest algorithm achieved the highest AUC (0.973), while the 2D radiomics model based on the Bagging decision tree algorithm showed the highest sensitivity (0.873), specificity (0.939), accuracy (0.864), precision (0.880), and F1 score (0.876).
conclusionA systematic comparison was conducted on the performance of 2D and 3D radiomics models, as well as deep learning models, in the diagnosis of four-category fatty liver. This comprehensive model comparison provides a broader perspective for determining the optimal model for liver fat diagnosis. It was found that the 2D radiomics models based on the random forest and Bagging decision tree algorithms show high consistency with the QCT-based classification diagnosis of fatty liver used by experienced radiologists.
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.