EP23.61: Ultrasound‐based DML models performance versus expert subjective assessment for discriminating adnexal masses: a head‐to‐head meta‐analysis

Our meta-analysis aims to evaluate DML's performance compared to expert evaluation in diagnosing adnexal masses using ultrasound images. Studies published between 2000 and 2023 were searched in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane and Web of Science. The study quality was assessed using QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2). Pooled sensitivity and specificity for both methods were estimated and compared. From 1,659 citations, we selected four studies to include in this meta-analysis. The mean prevalence of ovarian cancer was 30.6%. Quality of the studies were good with low risk of bias for index and reference tests, but with high risk of bias for patient selection domain. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were 86.0% and 90.0% DML and 86.0% and 89.0% for expert accuracy (p = 0.9883). We found no significant differences between DML systems and expert evaluations in detecting and differentially diagnosing adnexal masses using ultrasound images.