Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36980134›Full record

ReviewChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Efficacy of Artificial Intelligence in the Categorisation of Paediatric Pneumonia on Chest Radiographs: A Systematic Review.

Erica Louise Field, Winnie Tam, Niamh Moore, Mark McEntee

Full text readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

4 authors.

Erica Louise FieldDiscipline of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy, University College Cork, College Road, T12 K8AF Cork, Ireland.
Winnie TamDepartment of Midwifery and Radiography, University of London, Northampton Square, London EC1V 0HB, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6241-4810
Niamh MooreDiscipline of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy, University College Cork, College Road, T12 K8AF Cork, Ireland.
Mark McEnteeDiscipline of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy, University College Cork, College Road, T12 K8AF Cork, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-7045-2190

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to systematically review the literature to synthesise and summarise the evidence surrounding the efficacy of artificial intelligence (AI) in classifying paediatric pneumonia on chest radiographs (CXRs). Following the initial search of studies that matched the pre-set criteria, their data were extracted using a data extraction tool, and the included studies were assessed via critical appraisal tools and risk of bias. Results were accumulated, and outcome measures analysed included sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the curve (AUC). Five studies met the inclusion criteria. The highest sensitivity was by an ensemble AI algorithm (96.3%). DenseNet201 obtained the highest level of specificity and accuracy (94%, 95%). The most outstanding AUC value was achieved by the VGG16 algorithm (96.2%). Some of the AI models achieved close to 100% diagnostic accuracy. To assess the efficacy of AI in a clinical setting, these AI models should be compared to that of radiologists. The included and evaluated AI algorithms showed promising results. These algorithms can potentially ease and speed up diagnosis once the studies are replicated and their performances are assessed in clinical settings, potentially saving millions of lives.

Indexed as

artificial intelligence (AI)chest radiographcomputer-aided detection (CAD)deep learning (DL)paediatric pneumonia

Identifiers

PMID36980134
PMCPMC10047666

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read9
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.