ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2026
Contrast-enhanced ultrasound and Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System ultrasound classification for risk assessment of ovarian and adnexal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic significance of cancer antigen 125/carcinoembryonic antigen ratio combined with IOTA-ADNEX model in discriminating between primary ovarian cancer and ovarian metastases.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Diagnostic performance of deep learning models on ultrasound images for distinguishing benign from malignant ovarian cysts.Journal of ovarian research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System ultrasound classification (O-RADS US) have been applied in the diagnosis and risk stratification of ovarian and adnexal masses. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value and risk stratification efficacy of CEUS and O-RADS US for ovarian and adnexal masses. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies in the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databased published until October 2024 was conducted. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) was used for quality assessment. The Deeks funnel plot asymmetry test was used for the publication bias. The summary sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve were used for the evaluation of diagnostic performance. The bivariate mixed-effects model in STATA 17.0 software (StataCorp) was used for the meta-analysis. Results: This meta-analysis included a total of 21 studies, comprising 5,433 patients. CEUS was evaluated in seven studies, while O-RADS US was assessed in 15 studies, with one study using both methods for evaluation. The quality assessment revealed that bias risk and concerns regarding applicability were generally related to patient selection. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of CEUS were 93% [95% confidence interval (CI): 87-96%] and 91% (95% CI: 82-95%), respectively. For O-RADS US, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 94% (95% CI: 87-98%) and 81% (95% CI: 72-88%), respectively. Conclusions: CEUS and O-RADS US both exhibit high sensitivity in differentiating ovarian or adnexal masses, with CEUS also demonstrating very high specificity.
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.