ArticleScientific reports2025
Development and validation of automated three-dimensional convolutional neural network model for acute appendicitis diagnosis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence for acute appendicitis diagnosis: A systematic review of current evidence, challenges, and future directions.Medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Anatomically Localized Detection of Six Acute Abdominal Emergencies on CT Using Multi-window Deep Learning: Development and Validation.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence and robotic surgery in emergency gastrointestinal procedures: a review of current evidence and future directions.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Preoperative differentiation of acute appendicitis using NLR, SII, and maximum appendiceal diameter: a retrospective single-center diagnostic study.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in acute appendicitis: A comprehensive review of machine learning and deep learning applications.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rapid, accurate preoperative imaging diagnostics of appendicitis are critical in surgical decisions of emergency care. This study developed a fully automated diagnostic framework using a 3D convolutional neural network (CNN) to identify appendicitis and clinical information from patients with abdominal pain, including contrast-enhanced abdominopelvic computed tomography images. A deep learning model-Information of Appendix (IA)-was developed, and the volume of interest (VOI) region corresponding to the anatomical location of the appendix was automatically extracted. It was analysed using a two-stage binary algorithm with transfer learning. The algorithm predicted three categories: non-, simple, and complicated appendicitis. The 3D-CNN architecture incorporated ResNet, DenseNet, and EfficientNet. The IA model utilising DenseNet169 demonstrated 79.5% accuracy (76.4-82.6%), 70.1% sensitivity (64.7-75.0%), 87.6% specificity (83.7-90.7%), and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.865 (0.862-0.867), with a negative appendectomy rate of 12.4% in stage 1 classification identifying non-appendicitis versus. appendicitis. In stage 2, the IA model exhibited 76.1% accuracy (70.3-81.9%), 82.6% sensitivity (62.9-90.9%), 74.2% specificity (67.0-80.3%), and an AUC of 0.827 (0.820-0.833), differentiating simple and complicated appendicitis. This IA model can provide physicians with reliable diagnostic information on appendicitis with generality and reproducibility within the VOI.
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.