Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31173130›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2019

Deep Learning-Assisted Diagnosis of Cerebral Aneurysms Using the HeadXNet Model.

Allison Park, Chris Chute, Pranav Rajpurkar, Joe Lou, Robyn L Ball, Katie Shpanskaya, Rashad Jabarkheel, Lily H Kim, Emily McKenna, Joe Tseng and 11 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 112 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
112citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–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

112 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Application of convolutional network models in detection of intracranial aneurysms: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2023
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Patient and physician perspectives on large language model generated responses about brain aneurysm.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. [Expert consensus on artificial intelligence-assisted data acquisition and clinical application in electronic nasopharyngolaryngoscopy].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2026
    Article
  16. Artificial intelligence for early diagnosis in emergency department.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2026
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

52 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

21 authors.

Allison ParkDepartment of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Chris ChuteDepartment of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Pranav RajpurkarDepartment of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Joe LouDepartment of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Robyn L BallAIMI Center, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Katie ShpanskayaSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Rashad JabarkheelSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Lily H KimSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Emily McKennaSchool of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Joe TsengSchool of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Jason NiSchool of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Fidaa WishahSchool of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Fred WittberSchool of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
David S HongSchool of Medicine, Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Thomas J WilsonSchool of Medicine, Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Safwan HalabiSchool of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Sanjay BasuSchool of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Bhavik N PatelSchool of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Matthew P LungrenSchool of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Andrew Y NgDepartment of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Kristen W YeomSchool of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.

Funding

Spectrum Stanford Center for clinical and Translational Research and EducationUL1TR001085 · NCATS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI CULLEN, MARK RICHARD, GREENBERG, HARRY BERNARD · 2013 to 2017
$37.1M
Trial of strategies to communicate genetic information to different ethnic and racial subpopulationsU54MD010724 · NIMHD · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI MALDONADO, YVONNE A. · 2016 to 2021
$16.3M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001085NIMHD NIH HHS U54 MD010724
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Deep learning has the potential to augment clinician performance in medical imaging interpretation and reduce time to diagnosis through automated segmentation. Few studies to date have explored this topic. Objective: To develop and apply a neural network segmentation model (the HeadXNet model) capable of generating precise voxel-by-voxel predictions of intracranial aneurysms on head computed tomographic angiography (CTA) imaging to augment clinicians' intracranial aneurysm diagnostic performance. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this diagnostic study, a 3-dimensional convolutional neural network architecture was developed using a training set of 611 head CTA examinations to generate aneurysm segmentations. Segmentation outputs from this support model on a test set of 115 examinations were provided to clinicians. Between August 13, 2018, and October 4, 2018, 8 clinicians diagnosed the presence of aneurysm on the test set, both with and without model augmentation, in a crossover design using randomized order and a 14-day washout period. Head and neck examinations performed between January 3, 2003, and May 31, 2017, at a single academic medical center were used to train, validate, and test the model. Examinations positive for aneurysm had at least 1 clinically significant, nonruptured intracranial aneurysm. Examinations with hemorrhage, ruptured aneurysm, posttraumatic or infectious pseudoaneurysm, arteriovenous malformation, surgical clips, coils, catheters, or other surgical hardware were excluded. All other CTA examinations were considered controls. Main Outcomes and Measures: Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, time, and interrater agreement were measured. Metrics for clinician performance with and without model augmentation were compared. Results: The data set contained 818 examinations from 662 unique patients with 328 CTA examinations (40.1%) containing at least 1 intracranial aneurysm and 490 examinations (59.9%) without intracranial aneurysms. The 8 clinicians reading the test set ranged in experience from 2 to 12 years. Augmenting clinicians with artificial intelligence-produced segmentation predictions resulted in clinicians achieving statistically significant improvements in sensitivity, accuracy, and interrater agreement when compared with no augmentation. The clinicians' mean sensitivity increased by 0.059 (95% CI, 0.028-0.091; adjusted P = .01), mean accuracy increased by 0.038 (95% CI, 0.014-0.062; adjusted P = .02), and mean interrater agreement (Fleiss κ) increased by 0.060, from 0.799 to 0.859 (adjusted P = .05). There was no statistically significant change in mean specificity (0.016; 95% CI, -0.010 to 0.041; adjusted P = .16) and time to diagnosis (5.71 seconds; 95% CI, 7.22-18.63 seconds; adjusted P = .19). Conclusions and Relevance: The deep learning model developed successfully detected clinically significant intracranial aneurysms on CTA. This suggests that integration of an artificial intelligence-assisted diagnostic model may augment clinician performance with dependable and accurate predictions and thereby optimize patient care.

Indexed as

Deep LearningClinical CompetenceComputer SimulationCross-Over StudiesDiagnosis, Computer-AssistedFemaleHumansIntracranial AneurysmMaleMiddle AgedNeurologic ExaminationNeurologistsRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID31173130
PMCPMC6563570

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.