Cargando…
Systematic review of research design and reporting of imaging studies applying convolutional neural networks for radiological cancer diagnosis
OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic review of design and reporting of imaging studies applying convolutional neural network models for radiological cancer diagnosis. METHODS: A comprehensive search of PUBMED, EMBASE, MEDLINE and SCOPUS was performed for published studies applying convolutional neura...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8452579/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33860829 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-07881-2 |
_version_ | 1784570100383219712 |
---|---|
author | O’Shea, Robert J. Sharkey, Amy Rose Cook, Gary J. R. Goh, Vicky |
author_facet | O’Shea, Robert J. Sharkey, Amy Rose Cook, Gary J. R. Goh, Vicky |
author_sort | O’Shea, Robert J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic review of design and reporting of imaging studies applying convolutional neural network models for radiological cancer diagnosis. METHODS: A comprehensive search of PUBMED, EMBASE, MEDLINE and SCOPUS was performed for published studies applying convolutional neural network models to radiological cancer diagnosis from January 1, 2016, to August 1, 2020. Two independent reviewers measured compliance with the Checklist for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging (CLAIM). Compliance was defined as the proportion of applicable CLAIM items satisfied. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-six of 655 screened studies were included. Many studies did not meet the criteria for current design and reporting guidelines. Twenty-seven percent of studies documented eligibility criteria for their data (50/186, 95% CI 21–34%), 31% reported demographics for their study population (58/186, 95% CI 25–39%) and 49% of studies assessed model performance on test data partitions (91/186, 95% CI 42–57%). Median CLAIM compliance was 0.40 (IQR 0.33–0.49). Compliance correlated positively with publication year (ρ = 0.15, p = .04) and journal H-index (ρ = 0.27, p < .001). Clinical journals demonstrated higher mean compliance than technical journals (0.44 vs. 0.37, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight opportunities for improved design and reporting of convolutional neural network research for radiological cancer diagnosis. KEY POINTS: • Imaging studies applying convolutional neural networks (CNNs) for cancer diagnosis frequently omit key clinical information including eligibility criteria and population demographics. • Fewer than half of imaging studies assessed model performance on explicitly unobserved test data partitions. • Design and reporting standards have improved in CNN research for radiological cancer diagnosis, though many opportunities remain for further progress. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00330-021-07881-2. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8452579 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84525792021-10-05 Systematic review of research design and reporting of imaging studies applying convolutional neural networks for radiological cancer diagnosis O’Shea, Robert J. Sharkey, Amy Rose Cook, Gary J. R. Goh, Vicky Eur Radiol Imaging Informatics and Artificial Intelligence OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic review of design and reporting of imaging studies applying convolutional neural network models for radiological cancer diagnosis. METHODS: A comprehensive search of PUBMED, EMBASE, MEDLINE and SCOPUS was performed for published studies applying convolutional neural network models to radiological cancer diagnosis from January 1, 2016, to August 1, 2020. Two independent reviewers measured compliance with the Checklist for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging (CLAIM). Compliance was defined as the proportion of applicable CLAIM items satisfied. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-six of 655 screened studies were included. Many studies did not meet the criteria for current design and reporting guidelines. Twenty-seven percent of studies documented eligibility criteria for their data (50/186, 95% CI 21–34%), 31% reported demographics for their study population (58/186, 95% CI 25–39%) and 49% of studies assessed model performance on test data partitions (91/186, 95% CI 42–57%). Median CLAIM compliance was 0.40 (IQR 0.33–0.49). Compliance correlated positively with publication year (ρ = 0.15, p = .04) and journal H-index (ρ = 0.27, p < .001). Clinical journals demonstrated higher mean compliance than technical journals (0.44 vs. 0.37, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight opportunities for improved design and reporting of convolutional neural network research for radiological cancer diagnosis. KEY POINTS: • Imaging studies applying convolutional neural networks (CNNs) for cancer diagnosis frequently omit key clinical information including eligibility criteria and population demographics. • Fewer than half of imaging studies assessed model performance on explicitly unobserved test data partitions. • Design and reporting standards have improved in CNN research for radiological cancer diagnosis, though many opportunities remain for further progress. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00330-021-07881-2. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-04-16 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8452579/ /pubmed/33860829 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-07881-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Imaging Informatics and Artificial Intelligence O’Shea, Robert J. Sharkey, Amy Rose Cook, Gary J. R. Goh, Vicky Systematic review of research design and reporting of imaging studies applying convolutional neural networks for radiological cancer diagnosis |
title | Systematic review of research design and reporting of imaging studies applying convolutional neural networks for radiological cancer diagnosis |
title_full | Systematic review of research design and reporting of imaging studies applying convolutional neural networks for radiological cancer diagnosis |
title_fullStr | Systematic review of research design and reporting of imaging studies applying convolutional neural networks for radiological cancer diagnosis |
title_full_unstemmed | Systematic review of research design and reporting of imaging studies applying convolutional neural networks for radiological cancer diagnosis |
title_short | Systematic review of research design and reporting of imaging studies applying convolutional neural networks for radiological cancer diagnosis |
title_sort | systematic review of research design and reporting of imaging studies applying convolutional neural networks for radiological cancer diagnosis |
topic | Imaging Informatics and Artificial Intelligence |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8452579/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33860829 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-07881-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT oshearobertj systematicreviewofresearchdesignandreportingofimagingstudiesapplyingconvolutionalneuralnetworksforradiologicalcancerdiagnosis AT sharkeyamyrose systematicreviewofresearchdesignandreportingofimagingstudiesapplyingconvolutionalneuralnetworksforradiologicalcancerdiagnosis AT cookgaryjr systematicreviewofresearchdesignandreportingofimagingstudiesapplyingconvolutionalneuralnetworksforradiologicalcancerdiagnosis AT gohvicky systematicreviewofresearchdesignandreportingofimagingstudiesapplyingconvolutionalneuralnetworksforradiologicalcancerdiagnosis |