Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40298029›Full record

SynthesisJournal of clinical ultrasound : JCU2025

Comparison of the Diagnostic Performance of Ovarian Adnexal Reporting Data System (O-RADS) With IOTA Simple Rules and ADNEX Model for Classifying Adnexal Masses: A Head-To-Head Meta-Analysis.

Gisela Almeida, Mar Bort, Juan Luis Alcázar

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of clinical ultrasound : JCU, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Comparative Diagnostic Performance of IOTA Simple Rules, O-RADS US, and Subjective Assessment in Differentiating Benign from Malignant Adnexal Masses.Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Gisela AlmeidaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Centro Hospitalar de Setubal, Setubal, Portugal.
Mar BortDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, Castellón, Spain.
Juan Luis AlcázarDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9700-0853

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the diagnostic accuracy of O-RADS (Ovarian Reporting and Data System) and IOTA (international Ovarian Tumor Analysis group) simple rules (SR) and ADNEX (Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adnexa) model for discriminating benign from malignant adnexal masses using meta-analysis.

methodsA systematic search of studies comparing O-RADS with SR and/or ADNEX in the same set of patients with an adnexal mass was performed in Medline, Web of Science, and Scopus databases from January 2020 to September 2023. Quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Quantitative meta-analysis was performed.

resultsNine articles comprising 3924 women (3979 adnexal masses) were ultimately included after exclusions. Three studies compared O-RADS versus SR, three studies compared O-RADS versus ADNEX, and three studies compared all three methods. The risk of bias was high for patient selection in QUADAS-2 in all studies. Six studies compared O-RADS versus SR; no significant differences were found (pooled sensitivity and specificity of O-RADS and IOTA SR were 94.0% and 77.0%, and 91.0% and 87.0%, respectively. p = 0.2204). Six studies compared O-RADS versus ADNEX; no significant differences were found (pooled sensitivity and specificity of O-RADS classification system and ADNEX were 95.0% and 79.0%, and 91.0% and 88.0%, respectively. p = 0.2307).

conclusionO-RADS classification has a similar diagnostic performance to IOTA SR and ADNEX for discriminating benign and malignant adnexal masses.

Indexed as

Adnexal DiseasesOvarian NeoplasmsDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansOvarySensitivity and SpecificityUltrasonographyADNEXadnexal massdiagnosisIOTAO‐RADSsimple rulesultrasound

Identifiers

PMID40298029
PMCPMC12413557

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.