Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37940797›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2023

Pulmonary abnormality screening on chest x-rays from different machine specifications: a generalized AI-based image manipulation pipeline.

Heejun Shin, Taehee Kim, Juhyung Park, Hruthvik Raj, Muhammad Shahid Jabbar, Zeleke Desalegn Abebaw, Jongho Lee, Cong Cung Van, Hyungjin Kim, Dongmyung Shin

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology experimental, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Heejun ShinArtificial Intelligence Engineering Division, RadiSen Co., Ltd, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0009-0005-7437-7278
Taehee KimArtificial Intelligence Engineering Division, RadiSen Co., Ltd, Seoul, Korea.
Juhyung ParkLaboratory for Imaging Science and Technology, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
Hruthvik RajArtificial Intelligence Engineering Division, RadiSen Co., Ltd, Seoul, Korea.
Muhammad Shahid JabbarArtificial Intelligence Engineering Division, RadiSen Co., Ltd, Seoul, Korea.
Zeleke Desalegn AbebawArtificial Intelligence Engineering Division, RadiSen Co., Ltd, Seoul, Korea.
Jongho LeeLaboratory for Imaging Science and Technology, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
Cong Cung VanDepartment of Radiology, National Lung Hospital, Hanoi, Vietnam.
Hyungjin KimDepartment of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Dongmyung ShinArtificial Intelligence Engineering Division, RadiSen Co., Ltd, Seoul, Korea. shinsae11@radisentech.com.ORCID 0000-0002-2549-0136
Seoul National University · KRHanoi Lung Hospital · VNRadiant Research (United States) · USSeoul National University Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChest x-ray is commonly used for pulmonary abnormality screening. However, since the image characteristics of x-rays highly depend on the machine specifications, an artificial intelligence (AI) model developed for specific equipment usually fails when clinically applied to various machines. To overcome this problem, we propose an image manipulation pipeline.

methodsA total of 15,010 chest x-rays from systems with different generators/detectors were retrospectively collected from five institutions from May 2020 to February 2021. We developed an AI model to classify pulmonary abnormalities using x-rays from a single system. Then, we externally tested its performance on chest x-rays from various machine specifications. We compared the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) of AI models developed using conventional image processing pipelines (histogram equalization [HE], contrast-limited histogram equalization [CLAHE], and unsharp masking [UM] with common data augmentations) with that of the proposed manipulation pipeline (XM-pipeline).

resultsThe XM-pipeline model showed the highest performance for all the datasets of different machine specifications, such as chest x-rays acquired from a computed radiography system (n = 356, AUC 0.944 for XM-pipeline versus 0.917 for HE, 0.705 for CLAHE, 0.544 for UM, p [Formula: see text] 0.001, for all) and from a mobile x-ray generator (n = 204, AUC 0.949 for XM-pipeline versus 0.933 for HE, p = 0.042, 0.932 for CLAHE (p = 0.009), 0.925 for UM (p = 0.001).

conclusionsApplying the XM-pipeline to AI training increased the diagnostic performance of the AI model on the chest x-rays of different machine configurations. RELEVANCE STATEMENT: The proposed training pipeline would successfully promote a wide application of the AI model for abnormality screening when chest x-rays are acquired using various x-ray machines. KEY POINTS: • AI models developed using x-rays of a specific machine suffer from generalization. • We proposed a new image processing pipeline to address the generalization problem. • AI models were tested using multicenter external x-ray datasets of various machines. • AI with our pipeline achieved the highest diagnostic performance than conventional methods.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceImage Processing, Computer-AssistedRadiographyRetrospective StudiesX-RaysArtificial intelligenceChest radiographyComputer-aided classificationDeep learningImage postprocessing (computer-assisted)

Identifiers

PMID37940797
PMCPMC10632317
OpenAlexW4388510248

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.