Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41810229›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026

Diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence in detection of ovarian cancer-a pilot study.

Dipanwita Banerjee, Ashok Sharma, Ekta Dhamija, Sahar Qazi, Sandeep R Mathur, Neerja Bhatla

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Dipanwita BanerjeeChittaranjan National Cancer Institute (CNCI), Kolkata, India.
Ashok SharmaAll India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Ekta DhamijaDepartment of Onco Radiology, BRAIRCH, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Sahar QaziAll India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Sandeep R MathurAll India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Neerja BhatlaAll India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To investigate a panel of variables using four machine learning based classifiers, i.e., support vector machine (SVM), random forest (RF), artificial neural network (ANN) and logistic regression (LR) to make a diagnosis of ovarian cancer, differentiating it from benign ovarian masses. Materials and methods: A prospective observational pilot study was done between November 2021 and June 2023. Following data pre-processing to ensure compatibility with ML models, four ML algorithms, i.e., support vector machine (SVM), logistic regression (LR), random forest (RF) and artificial neural network (ANN) were tested by multimodal parameters from the datasets of 50 patients presenting with suspected epithelial ovarian cancer (Group A) or benign ovarian tumour (Group B). Statistical analysis was done using STATA version 14.0. Results: We found that the machine learning approach could predict malignant tumours with appreciably high accuracy similar to a few studies done so far in this field. All four ML algorithms showed high level of accuracy with a maximum AUROC of 0.92 in the RF model. Both RF and SVM had an accuracy of 85.87 and 83.05%. Conclusion: The ML algorithms can detect ovarian cancers with a high level of accuracy. Further, a large-volume prospective study on large volume data sets is required before inclusion of ML algorithms in clinical practice.

Indexed as

AI and ovarian cancerartificial intelligence in ovarian cancerdiagnosis of ovarian cancer by artificial intelligencemachine learning in ovarian cancerML in ovarian carcinomaovarian carcinoma and AI

Identifiers

PMID41810229
PMCPMC12968258

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.