Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36777158›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2022

PathNarratives: Data annotation for pathological human-AI collaborative diagnosis.

Heyu Zhang, Yan He, Xiaomin Wu, Peixiang Huang, Wenkang Qin, Fan Wang, Juxiang Ye, Xirui Huang, Yanfang Liao, Hang Chen and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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.

Heyu ZhangCollege of Engineering, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Yan HeDepartment of Pathology, Longgang Central Hospital of Shenzhen, Shenzhen, China.
Xiaomin WuCollege of Engineering, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Peixiang HuangCollege of Engineering, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Wenkang QinCollege of Engineering, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Fan WangCollege of Engineering, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Juxiang YeDepartment of Pathology, School of Basic Medical Science, Peking University Health Science Center, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Xirui HuangDepartment of Pathology, Longgang Central Hospital of Shenzhen, Shenzhen, China.
Yanfang LiaoDepartment of Pathology, Longgang Central Hospital of Shenzhen, Shenzhen, China.
Hang ChenCollege of Engineering, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Limei GuoDepartment of Pathology, School of Basic Medical Science, Peking University Health Science Center, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Xueying ShiDepartment of Pathology, School of Basic Medical Science, Peking University Health Science Center, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Lin LuoCollege of Engineering, Peking University, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pathology is the gold standard of clinical diagnosis. Artificial intelligence (AI) in pathology becomes a new trend, but it is still not widely used due to the lack of necessary explanations for pathologists to understand the rationale. Clinic-compliant explanations besides the diagnostic decision of pathological images are essential for AI model training to provide diagnostic suggestions assisting pathologists practice. In this study, we propose a new annotation form, PathNarratives, that includes a hierarchical decision-to-reason data structure, a narrative annotation process, and a multimodal interactive annotation tool. Following PathNarratives, we recruited 8 pathologist annotators to build a colorectal pathological dataset, CR-PathNarratives, containing 174 whole-slide images (WSIs). We further experiment on the dataset with classification and captioning tasks to explore the clinical scenarios of human-AI-collaborative pathological diagnosis. The classification tasks show that fine-grain prediction enhances the overall classification accuracy from 79.56 to 85.26%. In Human-AI collaboration experience, the trust and confidence scores from 8 pathologists raised from 3.88 to 4.63 with providing more details. Results show that the classification and captioning tasks achieve better results with reason labels, provide explainable clues for doctors to understand and make the final decision and thus can support a better experience of human-AI collaboration in pathological diagnosis. In the future, we plan to optimize the tools for the annotation process, and expand the datasets with more WSIs and covering more pathological domains.

Indexed as

colorectal cancerdata annotationhuman-AI collaborationmultimodal datapathology

Identifiers

PMID36777158
PMCPMC9908590

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.