ArticleIndian journal of pediatrics2026
Validation of DSD Interpreter, a Mobile Application for Point-of-Care Evaluation of Infants with Atypical Genitalia.
Article in Indian journal of pediatrics, 2026. 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.
- Validation of DSD Interpreter, a Mobile Application for Point-of-Care Evaluation of Infants with Atypical Genitalia: Correspondence.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Validation of DSD Interpreter, a Mobile Application for Point-of-Care Evaluation of Infants with Atypical Genitalia: Authors' Reply.Indian journal of pediatrics · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo develop and validate Disorders of Sexual Development (DSD) Interpreter, a point-of-care mobile application, to guide the management of infants with atypical genitalia.
methodsThe DSD interpreter offers clinical guidance based on key clinical and diagnostic inputs. The retrospective validation involved comparing its guidance with that of two pediatric endocrinologists, a neonatologist, a pediatrician, and a pediatric trainee, against the final clinical diagnosis in 55 children with atypical genitalia (XX DSD in 21, XY DSD in 27, ovotesticular DSD in one, and DSD mimics in six).
resultsThe concordance score (maximum score 153) for DSD interpreter (145; 94.8%) and pediatric endocrinologists (141; 92.2% and 135; 88.2%) were higher than that for the neonatologist (106; 69.3%), the pediatrician (98; 64.1%), and the trainee (59; 38.6%). Agreement analysis showed highest agreement for DSD interpreter (Cohen's κ 0.913, 95% confidence interval 0.825-0.978) and lowest for the trainee (Cohen's κ 0.131, 95% confidence interval 0.048-0.220). Discordance in the final diagnosis was noted in four cases for the DSD interpreter (7.3%). The diagnosis of CAH variants requiring urgent management was erroneous in four subjects for the neonatologist and the pediatrician and nine for the trainee. The DSD interpreter guidance could have prevented 92.7% of the discordance observed in the non-experts.
conclusionsThese findings suggest the role of the DSD interpreter in the point-of-care evaluation of children with atypical genitalia across resource settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41831161What 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.