ArticleNPJ digital medicine2025
AI enhanced diagnostic accuracy and workload reduction in hepatocellular carcinoma screening.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Application and prospects of artificial intelligence from tool empowerment to paradigm reconstruction for whole-course diagnosis and treatment of liver diseases by ultrasound].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2026Review
- Global Advances in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Research and Therapy in 2025.Cancer innovation · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in the Diagnosis and Prognostic Stratification of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Current Evidence, Clinical Applications, and Future Perspectives.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Liquid biopsy, multi-cancer early detection, and artificial intelligence: new frontiers in cancer screening from a technological and immunological perspective.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in hepatocellular carcinoma screening: applications and challenges.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) ultrasound screening encounters challenges related to accuracy and the workload of radiologists. This retrospective, multicenter study assessed four artificial intelligence (AI) enhanced strategies using 21,934 liver ultrasound images from 11,960 patients to improve HCC ultrasound screening accuracy and reduce radiologist workload. UniMatch was used for lesion detection and LivNet for classification, trained on 17,913 images. Among the strategies tested, Strategy 4, which combined AI for initial detection and radiologist evaluation of negative cases in both detection and classification phases, outperformed others. It not only matched the high sensitivity of original algorithm (0.956 vs. 0.991) but also improved specificity (0.787 vs. 0.698), reduced radiologist workload by 54.5%, and decreased both recall and false positive rates. This approach demonstrates a successful model of human-AI collaboration, not only enhancing clinical outcomes but also mitigating unnecessary patient anxiety and system burden by minimizing recalls and false positives.
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.