ArticleJournal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India2025
Comparison of ADNEX Model with GI-RADS Ultrasound Scoring System in Evaluation of Adnexal Mass.
Article in Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose of the study: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of two ultrasound scoring systems, Assessment of Different Neoplasias in the Adnexa (ADNEX) Model and Gynecology Imaging Reporting and Data System (GI-RADS), for the preoperative assessment of adnexal masses taking histopathology as gold standard. Methods: This analytical study assessed 60 patients of age > 14 years with adnexal masses, planned for surgery. Ultrasound assessment and risk categorization according to ADNEX and GI-RADS were performed 2-3 days prior to surgery. Histopathology was used as a reference standard for the calculation of validity of two ultrasound scoring systems for diagnosis of adnexal masses. Results: Out of 60 women (mean age, 35.52 ± 13.86 years; range, 16-70 years) with adnexal masses, 24 were malignant and 36 were benign. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy for the ADNEX model were 87.50%, 91.7%, 87.50%, 91.7% and 90.0%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy of the GI-RADS category were 95.8%, 61.1%, 62.2%, 95.7% and 75.0%, respectively. The diagnostic performance of the ADNEX model was better as compared to GI-RADS in terms of specificity and positive predictive value with a significant difference ( Conclusion: Although both ADNEX and GI-RADS systems had satisfactory diagnostic performances and high negative predictive values, the ADNEX model showed better specificity and positive predictive value in comparison with GI-RADS.
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.