Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32468486›Full record

ArticleJournal of digital imaging2020

An Open-Source, Vender Agnostic Hardware and Software Pipeline for Integration of Artificial Intelligence in Radiology Workflow.

Jae Ho Sohn, Yeshwant Reddy Chillakuru, Stanley Lee, Amie Y Lee, Tatiana Kelil, Christopher Paul Hess, Youngho Seo, Thienkhai Vu, Bonnie N Joe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of digital imaging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Mamba-based brain tumor segmentation of incomplete multi-modal MR images.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors.

Jae Ho Sohn *Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), 505 Parnassus Ave, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA. sohn87@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6733-7551
Yeshwant Reddy Chillakuru *Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), 505 Parnassus Ave, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
Stanley LeeRadiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), 505 Parnassus Ave, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
Amie Y LeeRadiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), 505 Parnassus Ave, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
Tatiana KelilRadiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), 505 Parnassus Ave, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
Christopher Paul HessRadiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), 505 Parnassus Ave, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
Youngho SeoRadiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), 505 Parnassus Ave, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
Thienkhai VuRadiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), 505 Parnassus Ave, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
Bonnie N JoeRadiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), 505 Parnassus Ave, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.

Funding

Biomedical Imaging for Clinician ScientistsT32EB001631 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI THOMAS M LINK · 2005 to 2026
$5.6M
NIBIB NIH HHS T32 EB001631
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although machine learning (ML) has made significant improvements in radiology, few algorithms have been integrated into clinical radiology workflow. Complex radiology IT environments and Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS) pose unique challenges in creating a practical ML schema. However, clinical integration and testing are critical to ensuring the safety and accuracy of ML algorithms. This study aims to propose, develop, and demonstrate a simple, efficient, and understandable hardware and software system for integrating ML models into the standard radiology workflow and PACS that can serve as a framework for testing ML algorithms. A Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine/Graphics Processing Unit (DICOM/GPU) server and software pipeline was established at a metropolitan county hospital intranet to demonstrate clinical integration of ML algorithms in radiology. A clinical ML integration schema, agnostic to the hospital IT system and specific ML models/frameworks, was implemented and tested with a breast density classification algorithm and prospectively evaluated for time delays using 100 digital 2D mammograms. An open-source clinical ML integration schema was successfully implemented and demonstrated. This schema allows for simple uploading of custom ML models. With the proposed setup, the ML pipeline took an average of 26.52 s per second to process a batch of 100 studies. The most significant processing time delays were noted in model load and study stability times. The code is made available at " http://bit.ly/2Z121hX ". We demonstrated the feasibility to deploy and utilize ML models in radiology without disrupting existing radiology workflow.

Indexed as

RadiologyRadiology Information SystemsSoftwareArtificial IntelligenceHumansSystems IntegrationWorkflowArtificial intelligenceInformaticsMachine learningPACSQuality improvement

Identifiers

PMID32468486
PMCPMC7522128

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.