ArticleScientific reports2023
Effectiveness of tuning an artificial intelligence algorithm for cerebral aneurysm diagnosis: a study of 10,000 consecutive cases.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Comparison of Two Versions of a Commercial Artificial Intelligence System for Identifying Candidate Locations of Cerebral Aneurysms: Reduction and Characterization of False-Positive Findings.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence for Cerebral Aneurysm Management: Integrating Imaging, Hemodynamics, and Clinical Decision Support.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Review
- [Artificial intelligence in surgical disciplines: Clinical application, advantages, and potential-a Delphi expert consensus].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Approved AI-based Brain Aneurysm Detection Software in Clinical Practice: Comparison with Radiologist Assessment and Image Re-review.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2026Article
- Expanding the applications of artificial intelligence in emergency radiology: Advancing precision medicine and resource efficiency.World journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Automated, anatomy-based, heuristic post-processing reduces false positives and improves interpretability of deep learning intracranial aneurysm detection models.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Questionnaire Survey on the Current Use of Brain Docks and Their Compliance with Guidelines in Japan.Neurologia medico-chirurgica · 2025Article
- Evaluation of AI-Powered Routine Screening of Clinically Acquired cMRIs for Incidental Intracranial Aneurysms.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Impact of an AI software on the diagnostic performance and reading time for the detection of cerebral aneurysms on time of flight MR-angiography.Neuroradiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diagnostic image analysis for unruptured cerebral aneurysms using artificial intelligence has a very high sensitivity. However, further improvement is needed because of a relatively high number of false positives. This study aimed to confirm the clinical utility of tuning an artificial intelligence algorithm for cerebral aneurysm diagnosis. We extracted 10,000 magnetic resonance imaging scans of participants who underwent brain screening using the "Brain Dock" system. The sensitivity and false positives/case for aneurysm detection were compared before and after tuning the algorithm. The initial diagnosis included only cases for which feedback to the algorithm was provided. In the primary analysis, the sensitivity of aneurysm diagnosis decreased from 96.5 to 90% and the false positives/case improved from 2.06 to 0.99 after tuning the algorithm (P < 0.001). In the secondary analysis, the sensitivity of aneurysm diagnosis decreased from 98.8 to 94.6% and the false positives/case improved from 1.99 to 1.03 after tuning the algorithm (P < 0.001). The false positives/case reduced without a significant decrease in sensitivity. Using large clinical datasets, we demonstrated that by tuning the algorithm, we could significantly reduce false positives with a minimal decline in sensitivity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.