ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2025
The Impact of Echogenicity Grading on the Diagnostic Performance of C-TIRADS.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nomogram for predicting papillary thyroid carcinoma risk combined with clinical, biochemical and ultrasonographic indicators.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a multimodal predictive model based on clinical, biochemical, and quantitative dual-energy CT parameters: for predicting the benignity and malignancy of thyroid nodules.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
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: To investigate whether echogenicity grading can improve the diagnostic performance of the Chinese Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (C-TIRADS). Patients and methods: Ultrasonic (US) images of 646 thyroid nodules (TNs) were retrospectively reviewed. The sonographic features of each nodule were analyzed and noted, including the orientation, margin, composition, echogenicity, echogenic foci, and extrathyroidal extension. Hypoechoic was further graded as mildly, moderately and markedly hypoechoic, and the malignancy risk at different echogenicity levels was compared. Each nodule was categorized according to C-TIRADS using markedly hypoechoic, modified markedly hypoechoic, and hypoechoic as malignant indicators, and the classification results were recorded as TI-RADS 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) of the different echogenicity and TIRADS were compared using chi-square analysis and Receiver Operating Characteristic curves (ROC). Binary logistic regression analysis was used to calculate cancer risk for different echogenicity. The interobserver agreement in the grading of echogenic of the nodules was also assessed. Results: Most malignant nodules were hypoechoic (85.2%), and the malignancy risk of hypoechoic nodules was significantly higher than that of iso-hyperechoic nodules (34.4% vs 9.8%). The malignancy risk gradually increased as nodule echogenicity decreased (odd ratios (ORs) of 2.132, 10.009, and 15.006, respectively). There was no significant difference in the malignancy risk between moderately and markedly hypoechoic nodules ( Conclusion: Stratifying hypoechogenic to three degrees enhances confidence in evaluating malignancy risk. Compared to markedly hypoechoic, the modified markedly hypoechoic significantly boosted the ability of C-TIRADS to differentiate benign TNs from malignant ones.
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.