Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32108895›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2020

Assessment of Expert-Level Automated Detection of Plasmodium falciparum in Digitized Thin Blood Smear Images.

Po-Chen Kuo, Hao-Yuan Cheng, Pi-Fang Chen, Yu-Lun Liu, Martin Kang, Min-Chu Kuo, Shih-Fen Hsu, Hsin-Jung Lu, Stefan Hong, Chan-Hung Su and 3 more

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

13 authors.

Po-Chen KuoTaiwan AI Labs, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Hao-Yuan ChengTaiwan Centers for Disease Control, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Pi-Fang ChenTaiwan Centers for Disease Control, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Yu-Lun LiuTaiwan Centers for Disease Control, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Martin KangTaiwan AI Labs, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Min-Chu KuoTaiwan Centers for Disease Control, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Shih-Fen HsuTaiwan Centers for Disease Control, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Hsin-Jung LuTaiwan Centers for Disease Control, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Stefan HongTaiwan AI Labs, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Chan-Hung SuTaiwan AI Labs, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Ding-Ping LiuTaiwan Centers for Disease Control, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Yi-Chin TuTaiwan AI Labs, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Jen-Hsiang ChuangTaiwan Centers for Disease Control, Taipei City, Taiwan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Decades of effort have been devoted to establishing an automated microscopic diagnosis of malaria, but there are challenges in achieving expert-level performance in real-world clinical settings because publicly available annotated data for benchmark and validation are required. Objective: To assess an expert-level malaria detection algorithm using a publicly available benchmark image data set. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this diagnostic study, clinically validated malaria image data sets, the Taiwan Images for Malaria Eradication (TIME), were created by digitizing thin blood smears acquired from patients with malaria selected from the biobank of the Taiwan Centers for Disease Control from January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2018. These smear images were annotated by 4 clinical laboratory scientists who worked in medical centers in Taiwan and trained for malaria microscopic diagnosis at the national reference laboratory of the Taiwan Centers for Disease Control. With TIME, a convolutional neural network-based object detection algorithm was developed for identification of malaria-infected red blood cells. A diagnostic challenge using another independent data set within TIME was performed to compare the algorithm performance against that of human experts as clinical validation. Main Outcomes and Measures: Performance on detecting Plasmodium falciparum-infected blood cells was measured by average precision, and performance on detecting P falciparum infection at the image level was measured using sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: The TIME data sets contained 8145 images of 36 blood smears from patients with suspected malaria (30 P falciparum-positive and 6 P falciparum-negative smears) that had reliable annotations. For clinical validation, the average precision was 0.885 for detecting P falciparum-infected blood cells and 0.838 for ring form. For detecting P falciparum infection on blood smear images, the algorithm had expert-level performance (sensitivity, 0.995; specificity, 0.900; AUC, 0.997 [95% CI, 0.993-0.999]), especially in detecting ring form (sensitivity, 0.968; specificity, 0.960; AUC, 0.995 [95% CI, 0.990-0.998]) compared with experienced microscopists (mean sensitivity, 0.995 [95% CI, 0.993-0.998]; mean specificity, 0.955 [95% CI, 0.885-1.000]). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings suggest that a clinically validated expert-level malaria detection algorithm can be developed by using reliable data sets.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsDatasets as TopicHumansMalariaPlasmodium falciparumRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID32108895
PMCPMC7049085

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.