Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34542644›Full record

ArticleClinical neuroradiology2022

Assessment of Artificial Intelligence Automatic Multiple Sclerosis Lesion Delineation Tool for Clinical Use.

Amalie Monberg Hindsholm, Stig Præstekjær Cramer, Helle Juhl Simonsen, Jette Lautrup Frederiksen, Flemming Andersen, Liselotte Højgaard, Claes Nøhr Ladefoged, Ulrich Lindberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical neuroradiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

8 authors.

Amalie Monberg HindsholmDepartment of Clinical Physiology, Nuclear Medicine and PET, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen east, Denmark. amalie.monberg.hindsholm@regionh.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0049-0842
Stig Præstekjær CramerDepartment of Clinical Physiology, Nuclear Medicine and PET, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen east, Denmark.
Helle Juhl SimonsenDepartment of Clinical Physiology, Nuclear Medicine and PET, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen east, Denmark.
Jette Lautrup FrederiksenDanish Multiple Sclerosis Center, Department of Neurology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Valdemar Hansens Vej 13, 2600, Glostrup, Denmark.
Flemming AndersenDepartment of Clinical Physiology, Nuclear Medicine and PET, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen east, Denmark.
Liselotte HøjgaardDepartment of Clinical Physiology, Nuclear Medicine and PET, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen east, Denmark.
Claes Nøhr LadefogedDepartment of Clinical Physiology, Nuclear Medicine and PET, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen east, Denmark.
Ulrich LindbergDepartment of Clinical Physiology, Nuclear Medicine and PET, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen east, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo implement and validate an existing algorithm for automatic delineation of white matter lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) on a local single-center dataset.

methodsWe implemented a white matter hyperintensity segmentation model, based on a 2D convolutional neural network, using the conventional T2-weighted fluid attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) MRI sequence as input. The model was adapted for delineation of MS lesions by further training on a local dataset of 93 MS patients with a total of 3040 lesions. A quantitative evaluation was performed on ten test patients, in which model-generated masks were compared to manually delineated masks from two expert delineators. A subsequent qualitative evaluation of the implemented model was performed by two expert delineators, in which generated delineation masks on a clinical dataset of 53 patients were rated acceptable (< 10% errors) or unacceptable (> 10% errors) based on the total number of true lesions.

resultsThe quantitative evaluation resulted in an average accuracy score (F1) of 0.71, recall of 0.77 and dice similarity coefficient of 0.62. Our implemented model obtained the highest scores in all three metrics, when compared to three out of the box lesion segmentation models. In the clinical evaluation an average of 94% of our 53 model-generated masks were rated acceptable.

conclusionAfter adaptation to our local dataset, the implemented segmentation model was able to delineate MS lesions with a high clinical value as rated by delineation experts while outperforming popular out of the box applications. This serves as a promising step towards implementation of automatic lesion delineation in our MS clinic.

Indexed as

Multiple SclerosisAlgorithmsArtificial IntelligenceBrainHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeural Networks, ComputerClinical implementationConvolutional neural networkMagnetic resonance imagingWhite matter hyperintensity

Identifiers

PMID34542644
PMCPMC9424132

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.