ArticleBMC medical imaging2024
Establishment of an MRI-based radiomics model for distinguishing between intramedullary spinal cord tumor and tumefactive demyelinating lesion.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Radiomics and machine learning for differentiating pediatric intramedullary spinal tumors: a pilot study.European radiology experimental · 2026Article
- Holocord syringomyelia associated with von Hippel-Lindau disease: a case series.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Identification and mechanism analysis of biomarkers related to butyrate metabolism in COVID-19 patients.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveDifferentiating intramedullary spinal cord tumor (IMSCT) from spinal cord tumefactive demyelinating lesion (scTDL) remains challenging with standard diagnostic approaches. This study aims to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based radiomics model for distinguishing scTDL from IMSCT before treatment initiation.
methodsA total of 75 patients were analyzed in this retrospective study, comprising 55 with IMSCT and 20 with scTDL. Radiomics features were extracted from T1- and T2-weighted imaging (T1&T2WI) scans upon admission. Ten classification algorithms were employed: logistic regression (LR); naive bayes (NaiveBayes); support vector machine (SVM); k nearest neighbors (KNN); random forest (RF); extra trees (ExtraTrees); eXtreme gradient boosting (XGBoost); light gradient boosting machine (LightGBM); gradient boosting (GradientBoosting); and multi-Layer perceptron (MLP). The performance of the optimal model was then compared to radiologists' assessments.
resultsThis study developed 30 predictive models using ten classifiers across two imaging sequences. The MLP model with two sequences (T1&T2WI) emerged as the most effective one, showing superior accuracy in MRI analysis with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.991 in training and 0.962 in testing. Moreover, statistical analyses highlighted the radiomics model significantly outperformed radiologists' assessments (p < 0.05) in distinguishing between IMSCT and scTDL.
conclusionWe present an MRI-based radiomics model with high diagnostic accuracy in differentiating IMSCT from scTDL. The model's performance was comparable to junior radiologists, highlighting its potential as an effective diagnostic aid in clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.