Diagnostic meta-analysis

诊断性荟萃分析
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    由严重急性呼吸道综合症冠状病毒2(SARS-CoV-2)和流感病毒引起的呼吸道感染是持续和关键的。CobasLiatSARS-CoV-2和A/B流感测定(多重Liat),FDA授权的即时逆转录酶聚合酶链反应(RT-PCR)测定,具有20分钟的周转时间和高精度。本研究评估了该测定的汇集性能以提供实用信息。该荟萃分析在PROSPERO(注册号:CRD42023467579)中注册。在PubMed进行了系统的文献检索,Ovid-EMBASE,和Cochrane图书馆的文章评估到2023年9月的多重Liat测定的准确性。使用随机效应模型以实时RT-PCR(rRT-PCR)作为参考测试来计算合并的诊断值。来自8项研究的4,705份样本被纳入主要荟萃分析。多重Liat的总体合并敏感性和特异性分别为100.0%(95%置信区间[CI]=96.7%-100.0%)和99.7%(95%CI=98.7%-99.9%),分别。作为参考标准的关注变体或内部rRT-PCR测定的存在没有显著影响多重Liat的合并诊断性能。当来自9项研究的5333个样本被评估敏感性时,合并敏感性为100.0%(95%CI=85.8%-100.0%),无显著差异.这项荟萃分析证明了MultiplexLiat用于基于合并诊断值检测SARS-CoV-2的有用性。这些实际发现可能有助于为呼吸道感染患者的诊断和管理提供适当的设置。
    Respiratory tract infections caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and influenza viruses are persistent and critical. The Cobas Liat SARS-CoV-2 & influenza A/B assay (Multiplex Liat), the FDA-authorized point-of-care reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay, has a turnaround time of 20 min and high accuracy. This study evaluates the pooled performance of this assay to provide practical information. This meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42023467579). A systematic literature search was conducted within PubMed, Ovid-EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for articles evaluating the accuracy of the Multiplex Liat assay through September 2023. A random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled diagnostic values with real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR) as a reference test. A total of 4,705 samples from eight studies were included in the primary meta-analysis. The overall pooled sensitivity and specificity of Multiplex Liat were 100.0 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] = 96.7 %-100.0 %) and 99.7 % (95 % CI = 98.7 %-99.9 %), respectively. The presence of variants of concern or in-house rRT-PCR assays as reference standards did not significantly affect the pooled diagnostic performance of the Multiplex Liat. When 5,333 samples from nine studies were assessed for sensitivity, the pooled sensitivity was 100.0 % (95 % CI = 85.8 %-100.0 %) without a significant difference. This meta-analysis demonstrates the usefulness of Multiplex Liat for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 based on pooled diagnostic values. These practical findings may facilitate appropriate settings for the diagnosis and management of patients with respiratory tract infections.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    未经授权:脑放射性坏死(RN)通常是放射治疗完成后数月至数年发生的延迟现象。区分RN与肿瘤复发对标准MRI提出了诊断挑战。迄今为止,目前尚无关于最适合此目的的成像方式的循证指南.我们旨在回顾当前的文献,并进行诊断荟萃分析,比较已研究的各种成像方式以区分肿瘤复发和RN。
    方法:使用Scopus对PRISMA指南进行了系统搜索,PubMed/MEDLINE,和Embase。使用基于异质性的随机效应或固定效应比例荟萃分析确定集合敏感性和特异性。使用诊断赔率比,进行了诊断频率随机效应网络荟萃分析,并使用P分数分层排名对研究进行排名。
    结果:分析包括127项研究,共220个成像数据集,包括以下成像模式:MRI(n=10),MR光谱(MRS)(n=28),动态对比增强MRI(n=7),动态磁化率对比MRI(n=36),MR动脉自旋标记(n=5),弥散加权成像(n=13),扩散张量成像(DTI)(n=2),PET(n=89),和单光子发射计算机断层扫描(SPECT)(n=30)。MRS具有最高的合并敏感性(90.7%)。DTI具有最高的汇集特异性(90.5%)。我们的等级排名将SPECT和MRS列为最优先,MRI被列为最不优选。
    结论:这些发现表明,SPECT和MRS在区分RN和肿瘤复发方面比标准MRI具有更大的实用性。
    UNASSIGNED: Cerebral radiation necrosis (RN) is often a delayed phenomenon occurring several months to years after the completion of radiation treatment. Differentiating RN from tumor recurrence presents a diagnostic challenge on standard MRI. To date, no evidence-based guidelines exist regarding imaging modalities best suited for this purpose. We aim to review the current literature and perform a diagnostic meta-analysis comparing various imaging modalities that have been studied to differentiate tumor recurrence and RN.
    METHODS: A systematic search adherent to PRISMA guidelines was performed using Scopus, PubMed/MEDLINE, and Embase. Pooled sensitivities and specificities were determined using a random-effects or fixed-effects proportional meta-analysis based on heterogeneity. Using diagnostic odds ratios, a diagnostic frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis was performed, and studies were ranked using P-score hierarchical ranking.
    RESULTS: The analysis included 127 studies with a total of 220 imaging datasets, including the following imaging modalities: MRI (n = 10), MR Spectroscopy (MRS) (n = 28), dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (n = 7), dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI (n = 36), MR arterial spin labeling (n = 5), diffusion-weighted imaging (n = 13), diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) (n = 2), PET (n = 89), and single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) (n = 30). MRS had the highest pooled sensitivity (90.7%). DTI had the highest pooled specificity (90.5%). Our hierarchical ranking ranked SPECT and MRS as most preferable, and MRI was ranked as least preferable.
    CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest SPECT and MRS carry greater utility than standard MRI in distinguishing RN from tumor recurrence.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Meta-Analysis
    OBJECTIVE: Previous studies have shown inconsistent results regarding the usefulness of prolactin adjustment in bilateral inferior petrosal sinus sampling (BIPSS) in the differential diagnosis of adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH)-dependent Cushing syndrome (CS). This meta-analysis compared the diagnostic accuracy of prolactin adjustment versus no adjustment in BIPSS.
    METHODS: This study searched the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library, and WanFang databases for published data as of March 2022 on the use of prolactin adjustment in BIPSS to differentially diagnose ACTH-dependent CS. A Bayesian joint bivariate model was used in the head-to-head comparison of the diagnostic accuracy.
    RESULTS: This meta-analysis included a total of 10 studies with 300 patients. The combined sensitivity and specificity for BIPSS without prolactin adjustment were 94.47% (95% CI, 88.67%-98.44%) and 91.14% (95% CI, 57.17%-99.80%), respectively. The combined sensitivity and specificity after prolactin adjustment were 99.97% (95% CI, 99.03%-100.00%) and 80.69% (95% CI, 50.27%-97.82%), respectively. After the prolactin adjustment, the sensitivity of BIPSS to diagnose Cushing disease was improved with a statistically significant difference (difference in sensitivity, 5.39%; 95% CI, 1.37%-11.26%), whereas the decrease in specificity was without a statistically significant difference (difference in specificity, -9.20%; 95% CI, -42.02% to 26.61%).
    CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis indicated that prolactin adjustment in BIPSS might help to recognize Cushing disease among patient with ACTH-dependent CS. However, prolactin adjustment may not help identify ectopic ACTH syndrome in BIPSS.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Meta-Analysis
    背景:髋关节和/或膝关节置换术后早期准确检测假体周围感染(PJI)仍然具有挑战性。本系统综述和荟萃分析诊断测试准确性研究旨在评估血清和滑液白细胞介素(IL)-6检测PJI的诊断准确性。
    方法:我们使用医学副标题术语和关键词搜索了3个数据库,以查找到2021年12月31日的研究。研究报道血清和滑液IL-6检测PJI的敏感性和特异性。我们计算了合并的灵敏度,特异性,正负似然比,诊断优势比(DOR),和汇总接受者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)以评估血清和滑液IL-6的诊断准确性。
    结果:共纳入30项研究。汇集的敏感性,特异性,正负似然比,DOR,血清IL-6检测PJI的AUC为0.76(0.69-0.81),0.88(0.82-0.92),6.2(4.3-9.0),0.28(0.22-0.35),22(14-36)和0.88(0.85-0.91),分别。然而,滑液IL-6达到0.87(0.75-0.93)的合并敏感性,特异性为0.90(0.85-0.93),正负似然比为8.5(5.3-13.6)和0.15(0.08-0.29),57(21-156)的DOR,和AUC为0.94(0.92-0.96),均高于血清IL-6。
    结论:滑液IL-6测试可能是髋关节和/或膝关节置换术后PJI的一个有希望的测试。然而,考虑到滑液体积有限,侵入性获取滑液IL-6,血清IL-6试验也可以考虑。
    BACKGROUND: Early and accurate detection of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after hip and/or knee arthroplasty remains challenging. This systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of serum and synovial fluid interleukin (IL)-6 in detecting PJI.
    METHODS: We searched 3 databases for studies through December 31, 2021, using medical sub-headings terms and keywords. Studies reported sensitivity and specificity of serum and synovial fluid IL-6 in detecting PJI were considered. We calculated the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of serum and synovial fluid IL-6.
    RESULTS: Thirty studies were included. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio, DOR, and AUC of serum IL-6 in detecting PJI were 0.76 (0.69-0.81), 0.88 (0.82-0.92), 6.2 (4.3-9.0), 0.28 (0.22-0.35), 22 (14-36), and 0.88 (0.85-0.91), respectively. However, synovial fluid IL-6 achieved a pooled sensitivity of 0.87 (0.75-0.93), specificity of 0.90 (0.85-0.93), positive and negative likelihood ratio of 8.5 (5.3-13.6) and 0.15 (0.08-0.29), DOR of 57 (21-156), and AUC of 0.94 (0.92-0.96), which were higher than serum IL-6.
    CONCLUSIONS: Synovial fluid IL-6 test may be a promising test for PJI after hip and/or knee arthroplasty. However, considering the limited volume of synovial fluid and invasive acquisition of synovial fluid IL-6, serum IL-6 test may be also considered.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:本研究的目的是根据先前发表的研究,评估Wooley问题在确定围产期妇女抑郁症中的诊断特性。我们对围产期妇女中Wooley问题的诊断准确性进行了系统评价和荟萃分析。
    方法:2021年10月检索了9个数据库。所有主要研究都评估了Wooley问题的诊断特性,与围产期女性的诊断金标准相比,如果在研究中未确定为处于围产期,妊娠20周至分娩后4周的女性。进行了双变量混合效应荟萃分析,以评估合并的诊断特性并测量异质性。进行元回归以评估导致异质性的因素。
    结果:6项研究纳入综述,5项纳入荟萃分析。合并灵敏度(95%置信区间)为0.95(0.81-0.99),合并特异性为0.60(0.44-0.74),合并正似然比为2.4(1.6-3.4),合并负似然比为0.09(0.02-0.32),合并诊断比值比为27(7-106);异质性显著(I2=0.90,0.81-1.00).参与者年龄和背景(社区与医院)显著促成了异质性。
    结论:Wooley问题对围产期妇女具有较高的敏感性,但具有中等的特异性。Whooley问题是识别围产期妇女抑郁症的简短且可接受的工具。然而,存在错误地将高比例的女性识别为阳性的潜在风险。使用Wooley问题,然后使用辅助病例发现工具可以降低误诊风险。
    BACKGROUND: This study\'s objective was to assess the diagnostic properties of the Whooley questions in identifying depression among perinatal women according to previously published studies. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies investigating the diagnostic accuracy of the Whooley questions in perinatal women.
    METHODS: Nine databases were searched in October 2021. All primary studies evaluated the diagnostic properties of the Whooley questions compared with a diagnostic gold standard in women during the perinatal period or, if not identified as being in the perinatal stage within the study, women between 20 weeks\' gestation to 4 weeks post-delivery. A bivariate mixed-effects meta-analysis was performed to estimate pooled diagnostic properties and measure heterogeneity. Meta-regression was conducted to evaluate factors contributing to heterogeneity.
    RESULTS: Six studies were included in the review; five were used in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity (95 % confidence interval) was 0.95 (0.81-0.99), pooled specificity was 0.60 (0.44-0.74), pooled positive likelihood ratio was 2.4 (1.6-3.4), pooled negative likelihood ratio was 0.09 (0.02-0.32), and pooled diagnostic odds ratio was 27 (7-106); heterogeneity was substantial (I2 = 0.90, 0.81-1.00). Participant age and setting (community vs. hospital) significantly contributed to heterogeneity.
    CONCLUSIONS: The Whooley questions have high sensitivity but moderate specificity for perinatal women. The Whooley questions are a short and acceptable tool for identifying depression in perinatal women. However, a potential risk exists of incorrectly identifying a high proportion of women as positive. Using the Whooley questions followed by a secondary case-finding tool could reduce the misdiagnosis risk.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    主要通过逆转录酶聚合酶链反应(RT-PCR)技术检测病毒核酸来确认活动性SARS-CoV-2感染。评估体液反应的方法有助于监测疾病和确认暴露于病毒。
    评估通过RT-PCR确认的SARS-CoV-2感染的IgM和IgG抗体测试的准确性,并将其用作免疫监视的补充数据。
    通过搜索术语“COVID-19”进行文献研究,MEDLINE数据库中的“COVID-19诊断测试”和“测试”,EMBASE,科克伦图书馆,WebofScience和护理和相关健康文献累积索引,以搜索截至2020年9月发布的无语言限制的潜在合格观察性研究。
    合并的敏感性和特异性,不管收集时间,“IgM和/或IgG”为80.0%(CI95%72.0-86.0)和97.0%(CI95%94.0-98.0),分别。考虑免疫球蛋白M和G的血清学在“第15天和之后”具有很高的准确性:灵敏度和特异性分别为91.0%(CI95%85.0-94.0)和98.0%(CI95%95.0-99.0),DOR461和AUC0.98。
    这项研究表明,血清学是一组准确性很高的测试,主要是在感染后第二周。
    Active SARS-CoV-2 infection is confirmed mainly through the detection of viral nucleic acid via the reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) technique. Methods to assess humoral responses contribute to the monitoring of the disease and confirmation of exposure to the virus.
    To evaluate the accuracy of tests for IgM and IgG antibodies for SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by RT-PCR and utility as complementary data for immunosurveillance.
    Literature research was performed by searching the terms \"COVID-19\", \"COVID-19 diagnostic testing\" and \"test\" in the databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature to search for potentially eligible observational studies without language restrictions published up to September 2020.
    The pooled sensitivity and specificity, regardless of collection moment, was 80.0% (CI 95% 72.0-86.0) and 97.0% (CI 95% 94.0-98.0) for \"IgM and/or IgG\", respectively. Serology considering immunoglobulins M and G together had a high accuracy performance on \"fifteenth day and after\": sensitivity and specificity was 91.0% (CI 95% 85.0-94.0) and 98.0% (CI 95% 95.0-99.0) respectively, DOR 461 and AUC 0.98.
    This study shows that serology is a group of tests with high accuracy, mainly following the second week after infection.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:假体周围关节感染(PJI)是全髋关节置换术(THA)或全膝关节置换术(TKA)后的破坏性并发症。在修正THA和TKA中使用血清D-二聚体诊断PJI的证据很少且相互矛盾。本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在探讨D-二聚体在假体周围感染诊断中的准确性。
    方法:PubMed,Embase,从成立日期到2020年8月15日,对WebofScience进行了系统搜索。我们纳入了D-二聚体在假体周围感染诊断中的所有诊断研究。文献质量由QUADAS-2工具评估,Stata16和Revman5.3软件进行Meta分析。
    结果:在搜索策略确定的115个引用中,10项研究(包括1756名参与者)符合纳入标准。文献质量评价结果表明,大部分文献为低风险偏倚文献。D-二聚体联合诊断假体周围感染的敏感性为0.81(95%可信区间[CI]0.71-0.88),联合特异性为0.74(95%CI0.61-0.84),联合阳性似然比为3.1(95%CI2.0-5.0),综合负似然比0.26(95%CI0.16-0.41),联合诊断比值比12(95%CI5-27),摘要受试者操作特征曲线(SROC)下面积为0.85(95%CI0.81-0.88)。数据具有统计学意义。
    结论:D-二聚体对PJI具有较高的诊断价值,对假体周围感染的诊断具有临床意义。此外,关于D-二聚体阈值的研究相对较少,不同的采样类型,不同的实验室检测方法,不同的种族,所以更多的大样本前瞻性试验,多中心,未来应该进行科学的设计。
    BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). It is scarce and contradicting evidence supporting the use of serum D-dimer to diagnose PJI in revision THA and TKA. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the accuracy of D-dimer in the diagnosis of periprosthetic infections.
    METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science were systematically searched from the inception dates to August 15, 2020. We included all diagnostic studies of D-dimer in the diagnosis of periprosthetic infections. The literature\'s quality was evaluated by the QUADAS-2 tool, and Stata16 and Revman5.3 software carried out the meta-analysis.
    RESULTS: Of 115 citations identified by the search strategy, 10 studies (comprising 1756 participants) met the inclusion criteria. The literature quality assessment results show that most of the literature is low-risk bias literature. The combined sensitivity of D-dimer in diagnosing periprosthetic infections was 0.81 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71-0.88), combined specificity was 0.74 (95% CI 0.61-0.84), combined positive likelihood ratio was 3.1 (95% CI 2.0-5.0), combined negative likelihood ratio 0.26 (95% CI 0.16-0.41), combined diagnosis odds ratio 12 (95% CI 5-27), area under the Summary Receiver Operator Characteristic Curve (SROC) is 0.85 (95% CI 0.81-0.88). The data are statistically significant.
    CONCLUSIONS: D-dimer has a high diagnostic value in diagnosing PJI and has clinical significance in diagnosing periprosthetic infection. In addition, there are relatively few studies on the threshold of D-dimer, different sampling types, different laboratory detection methods, and different races, so more prospective trials with large samples, multi-centers, and scientific design should be carried out in the future.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:我们设计了一项荟萃分析,以评估循环非编码RNA(ncRNA)在先兆子痫早期预测中的临床意义和功效。
    方法:PubMed,Embase和Cochrane图书馆用于搜索文献。通过计算汇总接收器操作员特征(SROC)曲线下的面积来评估组合预测性能。通过荟萃回归分析和亚组分析分析异质性的潜在来源。所有统计分析和作图均由RevMan5.3和Stata12.0进行。
    结果:共有14篇文章中的41项研究,包括557名先兆子痫患者和842名对照,纳入我们的荟萃分析。所有研究在发病前收集血液。血液中的NcRNA在预测先兆子痫方面表现相对良好。联合检测灵敏度为0.71,特异度为0.84,SROC曲线下面积(AUC)为0.86。外周血单核细胞(PBMC)样品显示出最佳的诊断准确性。组合AUC为0.93。联合检测优于单一检测,miRNA优于circRNA。研究的异质性是由样本量决定的,lncRNA特征,lncRNA来源和种族。
    结论:循环ncRNAs是有价值的生物标志物,可作为子痫前期无创性早期预测生物标志物的候选物,具有巨大的临床应用前景。ncRNAs的临床价值需要进一步的多中心测试,全面和前瞻性研究,应该建立测试标准。
    BACKGROUND: We designed a meta-analysis to evaluate the clinical significance and efficacy of circulating noncoding RNAs (ncRNAs) in the early prediction of preeclampsia.
    METHODS: PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were used to search for literature. The combined prediction performance was evaluated by calculating the area under the summary receiver operator characteristic (SROC) curve. The potential sources of heterogeneity were analysed by meta-regression analysis and subgroup analysis. All statistical analyses and mapping were performed by RevMan 5.3 and Stata 12.0.
    RESULTS: A total of 41 studies from 14 articles, including 557 preeclampsia patients and 842 controls, were included in our meta-analysis. All studies collected blood before onset. NcRNAs in blood performed relatively well in predicting preeclampsia. The combined sensitivity was 0.71, the specificity was 0.84, and the area under the SROC curve (AUC) was 0.86. Peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) samples showed the best diagnostic accuracy. The combined AUC was 0.93. Combined detection was better than single detection, and miRNA was better than circRNA. The heterogeneity of the study was determined by sample size, lncRNA characteristics, lncRNA source and race.
    CONCLUSIONS: Circulating ncRNAs can be valuable biomarkers used as candidates for noninvasive early predictive biomarkers of preeclampsia and have great clinical application prospects. The clinical value of ncRNAs needs to be tested by further multicentre, comprehensive and prospective studies, and the test criteria should be established.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    UNASSIGNED: Depression is a symptom commonly encountered in primary care; however, it is often not detected by doctors. Recently, disease diagnosis and treatment approaches have been attempted using smart devices. In this study, instrumental effectiveness was confirmed with the diagnostic meta-analysis of studies that demonstrated the diagnostic effectiveness of PHQ-9 for depression using mobile devices.
    UNASSIGNED: We found all published and unpublished studies through EMBASE, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, and PsychINFO up to March 26, 2021. We performed a meta-analysis by including 1099 subjects in four studies. We performed a diagnostic meta-analysis according to the PHQ-9 cut-off score and machine learning algorithm techniques. Quality assessment was conducted using the QUADAS-2 tool. Data on the sensitivity and specificity of the studies included in the meta-analysis were extracted in a standardized format. Bivariate and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve were constructed using the metandi, midas, metabias, and metareg functions of the Stata algorithm meta-analysis words.
    UNASSIGNED: Using four studies out of the 5476 papers searched, a diagnostic meta-analysis of the PHQ-9 scores of 1099 people diagnosed with depression was performed. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.797 (95% CI = 0.642-0.895) and 0.85 (95% CI = 0.780-0.900), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio was 22.16 (95% CI = 7.273-67.499). Overall, a good balance was maintained, and no heterogeneity or publication bias was presented.
    UNASSIGNED: Through various machine learning algorithm techniques, it was possible to confirm that PHQ-9 depression screening in mobiles is an effective diagnostic tool when integrated into a diagnostic meta-analysis.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:肿瘤转移的早期诊断对临床治疗至关重要。人工智能(AI)在医学领域显示出巨大的前景。因此,我们旨在评估AI算法在使用医学放射学成像检测肿瘤转移中的诊断准确性。
    方法:我们检索了PubMed和WebofScience从1997年1月1日到2020年1月30日发表的研究。包括评估AI模型用于从医学图像诊断肿瘤转移的研究。我们排除了使用组织病理学图像或医学波形数据以及关注感兴趣区域分割的研究。提供足够信息以构建列联表的研究包括在荟萃分析中。
    结果:我们确定了2620项研究,其中包括69个。其中,34项研究纳入荟萃分析,合并敏感性为82%(95%CI79-84%),特异性为84%(82-87%),AUC为0·90(0·87-0·92)。对不同AI算法的分析显示,机器学习的合并敏感性为87%(83-90%),深度学习的敏感性为86%(82-89%)。机器学习的集合特异性为89%(82-93%),87%(82-91%)用于深度学习。
    结论:AI算法可用于使用医学放射学成像诊断肿瘤转移,其性能与医疗保健专业人员相当甚至更好,在敏感性和特异性方面。同时,医疗领域的人工智能应用迫切需要严格的报告标准,并与医疗保健专业人员进行外部验证和比较。
    背景:大学生创新创业训练计划计划。
    BACKGROUND: Early diagnosis of tumor metastasis is crucial for clinical treatment. Artificial intelligence (AI) has shown great promise in the field of medicine. We therefore aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of AI algorithms in detecting tumor metastasis using medical radiology imaging.
    METHODS: We searched PubMed and Web of Science for studies published from January 1, 1997, to January 30, 2020. Studies evaluating an AI model for the diagnosis of tumor metastasis from medical images were included. We excluded studies that used histopathology images or medical wave-form data and those focused on the region segmentation of interest. Studies providing enough information to construct contingency tables were included in a meta-analysis.
    RESULTS: We identified 2620 studies, of which 69 were included. Among them, 34 studies were included in a meta-analysis with a pooled sensitivity of 82% (95% CI 79-84%), specificity of 84% (82-87%) and AUC of 0·90 (0·87-0·92). Analysis for different AI algorithms showed a pooled sensitivity of 87% (83-90%) for machine learning and 86% (82-89%) for deep learning, and a pooled specificity of 89% (82-93%) for machine learning, and 87% (82-91%) for deep learning.
    CONCLUSIONS: AI algorithms may be used for the diagnosis of tumor metastasis using medical radiology imaging with equivalent or even better performance to health-care professionals, in terms of sensitivity and specificity. At the same time, rigorous reporting standards with external validation and comparison to health-care professionals are urgently needed for AI application in the medical field.
    BACKGROUND: College students\' innovative entrepreneurial training plan program .
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号