Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40470432›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Evaluating Partial Middle Ear Filling for the Diagnosis of Cholesteatoma Using Machine Learning: A Radiological Approach.

Naouar Ouattassi, Abdelhay Zoizou, Mustapha Maaroufi, El Mehdi Labiyad, Taha Benatiya Andaloussi, Najib Benmansour, Mohammed Ridal, Arsalane Zarghili, Mohamed Nouredine El Amine El Alami

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

9 authors.

Naouar OuattassiBiomedical and Translational Research Laboratory, Faculty of Medicine, Pharmacy and Dentistry, University Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah, Fez, MAR.
Abdelhay ZoizouLaboratory of Science, Engineering and Management, Higher School of Technology, University Sidi Mohammed Ben Abdellah, Fez, MAR.
Mustapha MaaroufiRadiology Department, Hassan II University Hospital, University Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah, Fez, MAR.
El Mehdi LabiyadOtolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery Department, Hassan II University Hospital, University Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah, Fez, MAR.
Taha Benatiya AndaloussiOtolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery Department, Hassan II University Hospital, University Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah, Fez, MAR.
Najib BenmansourOtolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery Department, Hassan II University Hospital, University Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah, Fez, MAR.
Mohammed RidalOtolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery Department, Hassan II University Hospital, University Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah, Fez, MAR.
Arsalane ZarghiliComputer Science Department, Intelligent Systems and Applications Laboratory, Faculty of Science and Techniques, University Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah, Fez, MAR.
Mohamed Nouredine El Amine El AlamiOtolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery Department, Hassan II University Hospital, University Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah, Fez, MAR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of middle ear partial filling on temporal bone computed tomography (CT) scan for middle ear cholesteatoma identification using supervised machine learning models.

methodsWe conducted an observational case-control study that retrospectively analyzed temporal bone CT scans from 212 patients from a single tertiary healthcare institution using supervised machine learning models, including k-Nearest Neighbors (kNN), Neural Networks, Logistic Regression, Support Vector Machine (SVM), and Random Forest. The study assessed the diagnostic value of partial middle ear filling for cholesteatoma. Limitations such as dataset imbalance and data complexity were addressed.  Results. In internal validation, kNN and Neural Networks achieved the highest performance (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC]: 1.000, classification accuracy [CA]: 99.6-99.7%, F1: 0.996-0.997), followed by Logistic Regression (AUC: 0.998, CA: 98.3%, F1: 0.983) and SVM (AUC: 0.997, CA: 97.5%, F1: 0.975). Random Forest performed the weakest (AUC: 0.980, CA: 92.0%, F1: 0.919). External validation (125 cases) revealed Neural Networks' superior generalizability (four errors), outperforming Logistic Regression (five), SVM (seven), Random Forest (28), and kNN (45). kNN demonstrated notably lower generalizability, suggesting limited robustness for unseen data.  Discussion. The study highlights the effectiveness of machine learning in diagnosing cholesteatoma. Addressing data imbalance and variability in CT scans was crucial for model performance. Further research is needed to refine these models and explore their integration into clinical practice.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencecomputed-tomographymachine learningmiddle ear cholesteatomatemporal bone

Identifiers

PMID40470432
PMCPMC12135721

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.