ArticleJournal of translational medicine2026
AI-assisted radiomics for classification of benign and non-benign right heart masses in 2D-echocardiography.
Article in Journal of translational medicine, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe rarity of right heart masses challenges diagnostic proficiency, while reproducibility is affected by the echocardiography operator. Artificial intelligence (AI)-based imaging tools may help address these limitations.
methodsIn this retrospective study (2013-2024), we enrolled surgical patients with right heart masses and obtained preoperative transthoracic (TTE) and transesophageal (TEE) echocardiographic images. Two-dimensional (2D) TTE (n = 98) and TEE (n = 87) images underwent radiomics analysis. Binary classification models were developed to differentiate benign from non-benign lesions using five machine-learning (ML) algorithms (decision trees, logistic regression, random forests, support vector machines (SVMs), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost)). ML performance was compared with that of a deep-learning model based on the residual network (ResNet)-18 architecture using standard evaluation metrics such as the area under the curve (AUC).
resultsIn 2D TTE analysis, ResNet-18 achieved the highest AUC (0.889), followed by XGBoost (0.836) and decision tree (0.815). ResNet-18 significantly outperformed SVM (P = 0.013) and logistic regression (P = 0.028), but showed no significant differences versus XGBoost (P = 0.408), decision tree (P = 0.429), or random forest (P = 0.053). In 2D TEE analysis, SVM achieved the highest AUC (0.959), followed by XGBoost (0.924) and random forest (0.906), with no significant differences among these models (all P > 0.05). ResNet-18 (AUC = 0.900) significantly outperformed only the decision tree (P = 0.027).
conclusionResNet-18 showed the highest TTE AUC and outperformed SVM and logistic regression, but was comparable to other ML models. SVM achieved the highest TEE AUC, with no significant differences among top models. These findings provide a preliminary AI benchmark for right heart mass diagnosis, though external validation is needed.
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.