Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38758252›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2024

Performance of AI to exclude normal chest radiographs to reduce radiologists' workload.

Steven Schalekamp, Kicky van Leeuwen, Erdi Calli, Keelin Murphy, Matthieu Rutten, Bram Geurts, Liesbeth Peters-Bax, Bram van Ginneken, Mathias Prokop

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. 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

9 authors.

Steven SchalekampDepartment of Imaging, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. steven.schalekamp@radboudumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3984-3596
Kicky van LeeuwenDepartment of Imaging, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Erdi CalliDepartment of Imaging, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Keelin MurphyDepartment of Imaging, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Matthieu RuttenDepartment of Imaging, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Bram GeurtsDepartment of Imaging, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Liesbeth Peters-BaxDepartment of Imaging, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Bram van GinnekenDepartment of Imaging, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Mathias ProkopDepartment of Imaging, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThis study investigates the performance of a commercially available artificial intelligence (AI) system to identify normal chest radiographs and its potential to reduce radiologist workload.

methodsRetrospective analysis included consecutive chest radiographs from two medical centers between Oct 1, 2016 and Oct 14, 2016. Exclusions comprised follow-up exams within the inclusion period, bedside radiographs, incomplete images, imported radiographs, and pediatric radiographs. Three chest radiologists categorized findings into normal, clinically irrelevant, clinically relevant, urgent, and critical. A commercial AI system processed all radiographs, scoring 10 chest abnormalities on a 0-100 confidence scale. AI system performance was evaluated using the area under the ROC curve (AUC), assessing the detection of normal radiographs. Sensitivity was calculated for the default and a conservative operating point. the detection of negative predictive value (NPV) for urgent and critical findings, as well as the potential workload reduction, was calculated.

resultsA total of 2603 radiographs were acquired in 2141 unique patients. Post-exclusion, 1670 radiographs were analyzed. Categories included 479 normal, 332 clinically irrelevant, 339 clinically relevant, 501 urgent, and 19 critical findings. The AI system achieved an AUC of 0.92. Sensitivity for normal radiographs was 92% at default and 53% at the conservative operating point. At the conservative operating point, NPV was 98% for urgent and critical findings, and could result in a 15% workload reduction.

conclusionA commercially available AI system effectively identifies normal chest radiographs and holds the potential to lessen radiologists' workload by omitting half of the normal exams from reporting. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: The AI system is able to detect half of all normal chest radiographs at a clinically acceptable operating point, thereby potentially reducing the workload for the radiologists by 15%. KEY POINTS: The AI system reached an AUC of 0.92 for the detection of normal chest radiographs. Fifty-three percent of normal chest radiographs were identified with a NPV of 98% for urgent findings. AI can reduce the workload of chest radiography reporting by 15%.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceRadiography, ThoracicRadiologistsWorkloadAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityYoung AdultArtificial intelligenceDiagnosis (computer-assisted)Radiography (thoracic)Respiratory tract diseasesWorkload

Identifiers

PMID38758252
PMCPMC11519193

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.