ReviewNarra J2025
Artificial intelligence-based deep learning algorithms for ground-glass opacity nodule detection: A review.
Review in Narra J, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence construction: a review of the bridge between CT imaging features of lung ground-glass nodules adenocarcinoma and carcinogenic driver genes.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Identifying a Critical Blind Spot: How Commercial AI (CAD) Systems Fail to Detect Faint Ground-Glass Opacities at -730 HU on Low-Dose CT.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Malignancy in Ground-Glass Opacity Using Multivariate Regression and Deep Learning Models: A Proof-of-Concept Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
Ground-glass opacities (GGOs) are hazy opacities on chest computed tomography (CT) scans that can indicate various lung diseases, including early COVID-19, pneumonia, and lung cancer. Artificial intelligence (AI) is a promising tool for analyzing medical images, such as chest CT scans. The aim of this study was to evaluate AI models' performance in detecting GGO nodules using metrics like accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, F1 score, area under the curve (AUC) and precision. We designed a search strategy to include reports focusing on deep learning algorithms applied to high-resolution CT scans. The search was performed on PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and ScienceDirect to identify studies published between 2016 and 2024. Quality appraisal of included studies was conducted using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool, assessing the risk of bias and applicability concerns across four domains. Two reviewers independently screened studies reporting the diagnostic ability of AI-assisted CT scans in early GGO detection, where the review results were synthesized qualitatively. Out of 5,247 initially identified records, we found 18 studies matching the inclusion criteria of this study. Among evaluated models, DenseNet achieved the highest accuracy of 99.48%, though its sensitivity and specificity were not reported. WOANet showed an accuracy of 98.78%, with a sensitivity of 98.37% and high specificity of 99.19%, excelling particularly in specificity without compromising sensitivity. In conclusion, AI models can potentially detect GGO on chest CT scans. Future research should focus on developing hybrid models that integrate various AI approaches to improve clinical applicability.
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.