Quality assessment of critical and non-critical domains of systematic reviews on artificial intelligence in gliomas using AMSTAR II: A systematic review

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of Clinical Neuroscience Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-29 DOI:10.1016/j.jocn.2024.110926
Umar Ahmed Siddiqui , Roua Nasir , Mohammad Hamza Bajwa , Saad Akhtar Khan , Yusra Saleem Siddiqui , Zenab Shahzad , Aabiya Arif , Haissan Iftikhar , Kiran Aftab
{"title":"Quality assessment of critical and non-critical domains of systematic reviews on artificial intelligence in gliomas using AMSTAR II: A systematic review","authors":"Umar Ahmed Siddiqui ,&nbsp;Roua Nasir ,&nbsp;Mohammad Hamza Bajwa ,&nbsp;Saad Akhtar Khan ,&nbsp;Yusra Saleem Siddiqui ,&nbsp;Zenab Shahzad ,&nbsp;Aabiya Arif ,&nbsp;Haissan Iftikhar ,&nbsp;Kiran Aftab","doi":"10.1016/j.jocn.2024.110926","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Gliomas are the most common primary malignant intraparenchymal brain tumors with a dismal prognosis. With growing advances in artificial intelligence, machine learning and deep learning models are being utilized for preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative neurological decision-making. We aimed to compile published literature in one format and evaluate the quality of level 1a evidence currently available.</div></div><div><h3>Methodology</h3><div>Using PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted within databases including Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane Library, and records with the application of artificial intelligence in glioma management were included. The AMSTAR 2 tool was used to assess the quality of systematic reviews and <em>meta</em>-analyses by two independent researchers.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>From 812 studies, 23 studies were included. AMSTAR II appraised most reviews as either low or critically low in quality. Most reviews failed to deliver in critical domains related to the exclusion of studies, appropriateness of <em>meta</em>-analytical methods, and assessment of publication bias. Similarly, compliance was lowest in non-critical areas related to study design selection and the disclosure of funding sources in individual records. Evidence is moderate to low in quality in reviews on multiple neuro-oncological applications, low quality in glioma diagnosis and individual molecular markers like MGMT promoter methylation status, IDH, and 1p19q identification, and critically low in tumor segmentation, glioma grading, and multiple molecular markers identification.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>AMSTAR 2 is a robust tool to identify high-quality systematic reviews. There is a paucity of high-quality systematic reviews on the utility of artificial intelligence in glioma management, with some demonstrating critically low quality. Therefore, caution must be exercised when drawing inferences from these results.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15487,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Neuroscience","volume":"131 ","pages":"Article 110926"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096758682400465X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Gliomas are the most common primary malignant intraparenchymal brain tumors with a dismal prognosis. With growing advances in artificial intelligence, machine learning and deep learning models are being utilized for preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative neurological decision-making. We aimed to compile published literature in one format and evaluate the quality of level 1a evidence currently available.

Methodology

Using PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted within databases including Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane Library, and records with the application of artificial intelligence in glioma management were included. The AMSTAR 2 tool was used to assess the quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses by two independent researchers.

Results

From 812 studies, 23 studies were included. AMSTAR II appraised most reviews as either low or critically low in quality. Most reviews failed to deliver in critical domains related to the exclusion of studies, appropriateness of meta-analytical methods, and assessment of publication bias. Similarly, compliance was lowest in non-critical areas related to study design selection and the disclosure of funding sources in individual records. Evidence is moderate to low in quality in reviews on multiple neuro-oncological applications, low quality in glioma diagnosis and individual molecular markers like MGMT promoter methylation status, IDH, and 1p19q identification, and critically low in tumor segmentation, glioma grading, and multiple molecular markers identification.

Conclusion

AMSTAR 2 is a robust tool to identify high-quality systematic reviews. There is a paucity of high-quality systematic reviews on the utility of artificial intelligence in glioma management, with some demonstrating critically low quality. Therefore, caution must be exercised when drawing inferences from these results.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用AMSTAR II对胶质瘤人工智能系统评价的关键和非关键领域的质量评估:一项系统评价
神经胶质瘤是最常见的原发性脑实质内恶性肿瘤,预后较差。随着人工智能的不断发展,机器学习和深度学习模型被用于术前、术中和术后的神经学决策。我们旨在以一种格式汇编已发表的文献,并评估目前可用的1a级证据的质量。方法采用PRISMA指南,在Medline、Scopus和Cochrane Library等数据库中进行全面的文献检索,纳入人工智能在胶质瘤管理中的应用记录。两位独立研究人员使用AMSTAR 2工具评估系统评价和荟萃分析的质量。结果从812项研究中纳入23项研究。AMSTAR II将大多数评论评为低质量或极低质量。大多数综述未能在与研究排除、元分析方法的适当性和发表偏倚评估相关的关键领域发表。同样,在与研究设计选择和个人记录中资金来源披露相关的非关键领域,依从性最低。在多种神经肿瘤学应用的综述中,证据质量中低;在胶质瘤诊断和MGMT启动子甲基化状态、IDH和1p19q鉴定等单个分子标记方面,证据质量低;在肿瘤分割、胶质瘤分级和多分子标记鉴定方面,证据质量极低。结论amstar 2是识别高质量系统评价的可靠工具。关于人工智能在神经胶质瘤管理中的应用的高质量系统评价缺乏,其中一些评价的质量非常低。因此,从这些结果进行推论时必须谨慎。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Neuroscience
Journal of Clinical Neuroscience 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
402
审稿时长
40 days
期刊介绍: This International journal, Journal of Clinical Neuroscience, publishes articles on clinical neurosurgery and neurology and the related neurosciences such as neuro-pathology, neuro-radiology, neuro-ophthalmology and neuro-physiology. The journal has a broad International perspective, and emphasises the advances occurring in Asia, the Pacific Rim region, Europe and North America. The Journal acts as a focus for publication of major clinical and laboratory research, as well as publishing solicited manuscripts on specific subjects from experts, case reports and other information of interest to clinicians working in the clinical neurosciences.
期刊最新文献
Health literacy, healthcare access, and self-perception of health among intracranial tumor patients: an analysis of the National Institute of Health (NIH) “All of Us” research program Ictal-interictal SPECT analysis using SPM and multimodal prediction of epilepsy surgery outcome Midline suprasellar epidermoid cyst Incidentally discovered high-flow vertebral arteriovenous fistula with cervical cord compression treated by proximal vessel occlusion Evaluating the predictive value of the modified frailty index (mFI-5) on postoperative outcomes in patients with high-grade gliomas
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1