ArticleTranslational pediatrics2025
A new modified endoscopic evaluation system and its diagnostic accuracy of adenoid hypertrophy in children.
Article in Translational pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Background: In recent years, nasopharyngeal endoscopy has been widely used in the diagnosis of adenoid hypertrophy. A novel, modified evaluation system was introduced to investigate the correlation between adenoid hypertrophy and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), including ear complications. The diagnostic efficacy of this system was based on and compared with three commonly employed endoscopic adenoid hypertrophy evaluation systems. Methods: This study was a prospective, single-center, observational study. A total of 184 children were recruited from the outpatient department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Shanghai Children's Hospital from January 2023 to December 2023. The adenoid grade was assessed using four endoscopic grading systems: percentage of 4-grade system, Parikh's grading system, airway/choana/eustachian tube (ACE) grading system, and anatomical adjacent of 5-grade system (modified Parikh's grading system). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves obtained from the four endoscopic grading systems were analyzed and compared, and the diagnostic efficacy indexes (such as sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy) were calculated. Furthermore, we assessed the consistency among these results in determining surgical indications and occurrence/development of secretory otitis media within a six-month observation period. Results: Among the different grading systems evaluated, the anatomical adjacent of 5-grade system (modified Parikh's grading system) demonstrated superior specificity, accuracy, and area under the curve (AUC) when compared to surgical indications as the reference standard. The diagnostic efficiency of this 5-grade system in determining the need for surgery in children with OSA was significantly better than either the percentage of 4-grade system or Parikh's grading system (P<0.05). The anatomical adjacent of 5-grade system showed no statistical difference compared with the ACE grading system (P=0.053). When using secretory otitis media as the reference standard, incorporating the anatomical adjacent of 5-grade system for evaluation resulted in increased sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and AUC, however, no significant difference was observed compared to Parikh's grading system (P=0.49). Conclusions: The anatomical adjacent of the 5-grade system (modified Parikh's grading system) enables a more accurate quantitative evaluation of adenoid hypertrophy during adenoid endoscopy, showing potential for improved diagnosis of progressive otitis media.
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.