Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36218149›Full record

ReviewDiagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey)2022

Key concepts, common pitfalls, and best practices in artificial intelligence and machine learning: focus on radiomics.

Burak Koçak

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

1 author.

Burak KoçakDepartment of Radiology, Başakşehir Cam and Sakura City Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are increasingly used in radiology research to deal with large and complex imaging data sets. Nowadays, ML tools have become easily accessible to anyone. Such a low threshold to accessibility might lead to inappropriate usage and misinterpretation, without a clear intention. Therefore, ensuring methodological rigor is of paramount importance. Getting closer to the real-world clinical implementation of AI, a basic understanding of the main concepts should be a must for every radiology professional. In this respect, simplified explanations of the key concepts along with pitfalls and recommendations would be helpful for general radiology community to develop and improve their AI mindset. In this work, twenty-two key issues are reviewed within three categories: pre-modeling, modeling, and post-modeling. Firstly, the concept is shortly defined for each issue. Then, related common pitfalls and best practices are provided. Specifically, the issues included in this paper were validity of scientific question, unrepresentative samples, sample size, missing data, quality of reference standard, batch effect, reliability of features, feature scaling, multi-collinearity, class imbalance, data and target leakage, high-dimensional data, optimization, overfitting, generalization, performance metrics, clinical utility, comparison with conventional statistical and clinical methods, interpretability and explainability, randomness, transparent reporting, and sharing data.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceRadiologyHumansMachine LearningReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID36218149
PMCPMC9682557

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.