Cargando…

Can AI distinguish a bone radiograph from photos of flowers or cars? Evaluation of bone age deep learning model on inappropriate data inputs

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the behavior of a publicly available deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) bone age algorithm when presented with inappropriate data inputs in both radiological and non-radiological domains. METHODS: We evaluated a publicly available DCNN-based bone age application. The DCN...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yi, Paul H., Arun, Anirudh, Hafezi-Nejad, Nima, Choy, Garry, Sair, Haris I., Hui, Ferdinand K., Fritz, Jan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8339162/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34351456
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00256-021-03880-y
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the behavior of a publicly available deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) bone age algorithm when presented with inappropriate data inputs in both radiological and non-radiological domains. METHODS: We evaluated a publicly available DCNN-based bone age application. The DCNN was trained on 12,612 pediatric hand radiographs and won the 2017 RSNA Pediatric Bone Age Challenge (concordance of 0.991 with radiologist ground-truth). We used the application to analyze 50 left-hand radiographs (appropriate data inputs) and seven classes of inappropriate data inputs in radiological (i.e., chest radiographs) and non-radiological (i.e., image of street numbers) domains. For each image, we noted if (1) the application distinguished between appropriate and inappropriate data inputs and (2) inference time per image. Mean inference times were compared using ANOVA. RESULTS: The 16Bit Bone Age application calculated bone age for all pediatric hand radiographs with mean inference time of 1.1 s. The application did not distinguish between pediatric hand radiographs and inappropriate image types, including radiological and non-radiological domains. The application inappropriately calculated bone age for all inappropriate image types, with mean inference time of 1.1 s for all categories (p = 1). CONCLUSION: A publicly available DCNN-based bone age application failed to distinguish between appropriate and inappropriate data inputs and calculated bone age for inappropriate images. The awareness of inappropriate outputs based on inappropriate DCNN input is important if tasks such as bone age determination are automated, emphasizing the need for appropriate oversight at the data input and verification stage to avoid unrecognized erroneous results.