Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37796505›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2023

Generative Artificial Intelligence for Chest Radiograph Interpretation in the Emergency Department.

Jonathan Huang, Luke Neill, Matthew Wittbrodt, David Melnick, Matthew Klug, Michael Thompson, John Bailitz, Timothy Loftus, Sanjeev Malik, Amit Phull and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
21.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

52 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 93 citations in OpenAlex.

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

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jonathan HuangDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Luke NeillDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Matthew WittbrodtResearch & Development, Northwestern Medicine Information Services, Chicago, Illinois.
David MelnickResearch & Development, Northwestern Medicine Information Services, Chicago, Illinois.
Matthew KlugResearch & Development, Northwestern Medicine Information Services, Chicago, Illinois.
Michael ThompsonResearch & Development, Northwestern Medicine Information Services, Chicago, Illinois.
John BailitzDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Timothy LoftusDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Sanjeev MalikDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Amit PhullDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Victoria WestonDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
J Alex HellerResearch & Development, Northwestern Medicine Information Services, Chicago, Illinois.
Mozziyar EtemadiResearch & Development, Northwestern Medicine Information Services, Chicago, Illinois.
Northwestern University · USNorthwestern Medicine · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Multimodal generative artificial intelligence (AI) methodologies have the potential to optimize emergency department care by producing draft radiology reports from input images. Objective: To evaluate the accuracy and quality of AI-generated chest radiograph interpretations in the emergency department setting. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective diagnostic study of 500 randomly sampled emergency department encounters at a tertiary care institution including chest radiographs interpreted by both a teleradiology service and on-site attending radiologist from January 2022 to January 2023. An AI interpretation was generated for each radiograph. The 3 radiograph interpretations were each rated in duplicate by 6 emergency department physicians using a 5-point Likert scale. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was any difference in Likert scores between radiologist, AI, and teleradiology reports, using a cumulative link mixed model. Secondary analyses compared the probability of each report type containing no clinically significant discrepancy with further stratification by finding presence, using a logistic mixed-effects model. Physician comments on discrepancies were recorded. Results: A total of 500 ED studies were included from 500 unique patients with a mean (SD) age of 53.3 (21.6) years; 282 patients (56.4%) were female. There was a significant association of report type with ratings, with post hoc tests revealing significantly greater scores for AI (mean [SE] score, 3.22 [0.34]; P < .001) and radiologist (mean [SE] score, 3.34 [0.34]; P < .001) reports compared with teleradiology (mean [SE] score, 2.74 [0.34]) reports. AI and radiologist reports were not significantly different. On secondary analysis, there was no difference in the probability of no clinically significant discrepancy between the 3 report types. Further stratification of reports by presence of cardiomegaly, pulmonary edema, pleural effusion, infiltrate, pneumothorax, and support devices also yielded no difference in the probability of containing no clinically significant discrepancy between the report types. Conclusions and Relevance: In a representative sample of emergency department chest radiographs, results suggest that the generative AI model produced reports of similar clinical accuracy and textual quality to radiologist reports while providing higher textual quality than teleradiologist reports. Implementation of the model in the clinical workflow could enable timely alerts to life-threatening pathology while aiding imaging interpretation and documentation.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceEmergency Medical ServicesEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadiologistsRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID37796505
PMCPMC10556963
OpenAlexW4387357807

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.