Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36913348›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Incorporating algorithmic uncertainty into a clinical machine deep learning algorithm for urgent head CTs.

Byung C Yoon, Stuart R Pomerantz, Nathaniel D Mercaldo, Swati Goyal, Eric M L'Italien, Michael H Lev, Karen A Buch, Bradley R Buchbinder, John W Chen, John Conklin and 11 more

Full text read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. [Explainable & Safe Artificial Intelligence in Radiology].Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

21 authors.

Byung C YoonNeuroradiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-2929-5677
Stuart R PomerantzNeuroradiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Nathaniel D MercaldoMassachusetts General Hospital Institute for Technology Assessment, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Swati GoyalMass General Brigham Data Science Office, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Eric M L'ItalienMass General Brigham Data Science Office, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Michael H LevEmergency Radiology & Neuroradiology Divisions, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Karen A BuchNeuroradiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Bradley R BuchbinderNeuroradiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
John W ChenNeuroradiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
John ConklinEmergency Radiology & Neuroradiology Divisions, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Rajiv GuptaNeuroradiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
George J HunterNeuroradiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Shahmir C KamalianEmergency Radiology & Neuroradiology Divisions, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Hillary R KellyNeuroradiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Otto RapalinoNeuroradiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-5038-4183
Sandra P RinconNeuroradiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Javier M RomeroNeuroradiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Julian HeNeuroradiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Pamela W SchaeferNeuroradiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Synho DoMass General Brigham Data Science Office, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Ramon Gilberto GonzálezNeuroradiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-0234-3897

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Machine learning (ML) algorithms to detect critical findings on head CTs may expedite patient management. Most ML algorithms for diagnostic imaging analysis utilize dichotomous classifications to determine whether a specific abnormality is present. However, imaging findings may be indeterminate, and algorithmic inferences may have substantial uncertainty. We incorporated awareness of uncertainty into an ML algorithm that detects intracranial hemorrhage or other urgent intracranial abnormalities and evaluated prospectively identified, 1000 consecutive noncontrast head CTs assigned to Emergency Department Neuroradiology for interpretation. The algorithm classified the scans into high (IC+) and low (IC-) probabilities for intracranial hemorrhage or other urgent abnormalities. All other cases were designated as No Prediction (NP) by the algorithm. The positive predictive value for IC+ cases (N = 103) was 0.91 (CI: 0.84-0.96), and the negative predictive value for IC- cases (N = 729) was 0.94 (0.91-0.96). Admission, neurosurgical intervention, and 30-day mortality rates for IC+ was 75% (63-84), 35% (24-47), and 10% (4-20), compared to 43% (40-47), 4% (3-6), and 3% (2-5) for IC-. There were 168 NP cases, of which 32% had intracranial hemorrhage or other urgent abnormalities, 31% had artifacts and postoperative changes, and 29% had no abnormalities. An ML algorithm incorporating uncertainty classified most head CTs into clinically relevant groups with high predictive values and may help accelerate the management of patients with intracranial hemorrhage or other urgent intracranial abnormalities.

Indexed as

Deep LearningAlgorithmsHumansIntracranial HemorrhagesRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID36913348
PMCPMC10010506

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read57
identifiers read7
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.