Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37899784›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of gastroenterology2023

Acute pancreatitis: A review of diagnosis, severity prediction and prognosis assessment from imaging technology, scoring system and artificial intelligence.

Jian-Xiong Hu, Cheng-Fei Zhao, Shu-Ling Wang, Xiao-Yan Tu, Wei-Bin Huang, Jun-Nian Chen, Ying Xie, Cun-Rong Chen

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of gastroenterology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
21.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

54 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jian-Xiong HuIntensive Care Unit, The Affiliated Hospital of Putian University, Putian 351100, Fujian Province, China.
Cheng-Fei ZhaoSchool of Pharmacy and Medical Technology, Putian University, Putian 351100, Fujian Province, China.
Shu-Ling WangDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou 350001, Fujian Province, China.
Xiao-Yan TuDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou 350001, Fujian Province, China.
Wei-Bin HuangDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou 350001, Fujian Province, China.
Jun-Nian ChenDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou 350001, Fujian Province, China.
Ying XieSchool of Mechanical, Electrical and Information Engineering, Putian University, Putian 351100, Fujian Province, China.
Cun-Rong ChenDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou 350001, Fujian Province, China. chcr789@139.com.
Fujian Medical University · CNPutian University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a potentially life-threatening inflammatory disease of the pancreas, with clinical management determined by the severity of the disease. Diagnosis, severity prediction, and prognosis assessment of AP typically involve the use of imaging technologies, such as computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasound, and scoring systems, including Ranson, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, and Bedside Index for Severity in AP scores. Computed tomography is considered the gold standard imaging modality for AP due to its high sensitivity and specificity, while magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound can provide additional information on biliary obstruction and vascular complications. Scoring systems utilize clinical and laboratory parameters to classify AP patients into mild, moderate, or severe categories, guiding treatment decisions, such as intensive care unit admission, early enteral feeding, and antibiotic use. Despite the central role of imaging technologies and scoring systems in AP management, these methods have limitations in terms of accuracy, reproducibility, practicality and economics. Recent advancements of artificial intelligence (AI) provide new opportunities to enhance their performance by analyzing vast amounts of clinical and imaging data. AI algorithms can analyze large amounts of clinical and imaging data, identify scoring system patterns, and predict the clinical course of disease. AI-based models have shown promising results in predicting the severity and mortality of AP, but further validation and standardization are required before widespread clinical application. In addition, understanding the correlation between these three technologies will aid in developing new methods that can accurately, sensitively, and specifically be used in the diagnosis, severity prediction, and prognosis assessment of AP through complementary advantages.

Indexed as

PancreatitisAcute DiseaseArtificial IntelligenceHumansPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesSeverity of Illness IndexAcute pancreatitisArtificial intelligenceImaging technologyPrognosis assessmentScoring systemSeverity prediction

Identifiers

PMID37899784
PMCPMC10600804
OpenAlexW4386994630

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.