Cargando…

Artificial intelligence for imaging-based COVID-19 detection: Systematic review comparing added value of AI versus human readers

PURPOSE: A growing number of studies have examined whether Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems can support imaging-based diagnosis of COVID-19-caused pneumonia, including both gains in diagnostic performance and speed. However, what is currently missing is a combined appreciation of studies compari...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kriza, Christine, Amenta, Valeria, Zenié, Alexandre, Panidis, Dimitris, Chassaigne, Hubert, Urbán, Patricia, Holzwarth, Uwe, Sauer, Aisha Vanessa, Reina, Vittorio, Griesinger, Claudius Benedict
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8594127/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34839214
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.110028
_version_ 1784599904217202688
author Kriza, Christine
Amenta, Valeria
Zenié, Alexandre
Panidis, Dimitris
Chassaigne, Hubert
Urbán, Patricia
Holzwarth, Uwe
Sauer, Aisha Vanessa
Reina, Vittorio
Griesinger, Claudius Benedict
author_facet Kriza, Christine
Amenta, Valeria
Zenié, Alexandre
Panidis, Dimitris
Chassaigne, Hubert
Urbán, Patricia
Holzwarth, Uwe
Sauer, Aisha Vanessa
Reina, Vittorio
Griesinger, Claudius Benedict
author_sort Kriza, Christine
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: A growing number of studies have examined whether Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems can support imaging-based diagnosis of COVID-19-caused pneumonia, including both gains in diagnostic performance and speed. However, what is currently missing is a combined appreciation of studies comparing human readers and AI. METHODS: We followed PRISMA-DTA guidelines for our systematic review, searching EMBASE, PUBMED and Scopus databases. To gain insights into the potential value of AI methods, we focused on studies comparing the performance of human readers versus AI models or versus AI-supported human readings. RESULTS: Our search identified 1270 studies, of which 12 fulfilled specific selection criteria. Concerning diagnostic performance, in testing datasets reported sensitivity was 42–100% (human readers, n = 9 studies), 60–95% (AI systems, n = 10) and 81–98% (AI-supported readers, n = 3), whilst reported specificity was 26–100% (human readers, n = 8), 61–96% (AI systems, n = 10) and 78–99% (AI-supported readings, n = 2). One study highlighted the potential of AI-supported readings for the assessment of lung lesion burden changes, whilst two studies indicated potential time savings for detection with AI. CONCLUSIONS: Our review indicates that AI systems or AI-supported human readings show less performance variability (interquartile range) in general, and may support the differentiation of COVID-19 pneumonia from other forms of pneumonia when used in high-prevalence and symptomatic populations. However, inconsistencies related to study design, reporting of data, areas of risk of bias, as well as limitations of statistical analyses complicate clear conclusions. We therefore support efforts for developing critical elements of study design when assessing the value of AI for diagnostic imaging.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8594127
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85941272021-11-16 Artificial intelligence for imaging-based COVID-19 detection: Systematic review comparing added value of AI versus human readers Kriza, Christine Amenta, Valeria Zenié, Alexandre Panidis, Dimitris Chassaigne, Hubert Urbán, Patricia Holzwarth, Uwe Sauer, Aisha Vanessa Reina, Vittorio Griesinger, Claudius Benedict Eur J Radiol Review PURPOSE: A growing number of studies have examined whether Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems can support imaging-based diagnosis of COVID-19-caused pneumonia, including both gains in diagnostic performance and speed. However, what is currently missing is a combined appreciation of studies comparing human readers and AI. METHODS: We followed PRISMA-DTA guidelines for our systematic review, searching EMBASE, PUBMED and Scopus databases. To gain insights into the potential value of AI methods, we focused on studies comparing the performance of human readers versus AI models or versus AI-supported human readings. RESULTS: Our search identified 1270 studies, of which 12 fulfilled specific selection criteria. Concerning diagnostic performance, in testing datasets reported sensitivity was 42–100% (human readers, n = 9 studies), 60–95% (AI systems, n = 10) and 81–98% (AI-supported readers, n = 3), whilst reported specificity was 26–100% (human readers, n = 8), 61–96% (AI systems, n = 10) and 78–99% (AI-supported readings, n = 2). One study highlighted the potential of AI-supported readings for the assessment of lung lesion burden changes, whilst two studies indicated potential time savings for detection with AI. CONCLUSIONS: Our review indicates that AI systems or AI-supported human readings show less performance variability (interquartile range) in general, and may support the differentiation of COVID-19 pneumonia from other forms of pneumonia when used in high-prevalence and symptomatic populations. However, inconsistencies related to study design, reporting of data, areas of risk of bias, as well as limitations of statistical analyses complicate clear conclusions. We therefore support efforts for developing critical elements of study design when assessing the value of AI for diagnostic imaging. Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd 2021-12 /pmc/articles/PMC8594127/ /pubmed/34839214 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.110028 Text en © 2021 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Kriza, Christine
Amenta, Valeria
Zenié, Alexandre
Panidis, Dimitris
Chassaigne, Hubert
Urbán, Patricia
Holzwarth, Uwe
Sauer, Aisha Vanessa
Reina, Vittorio
Griesinger, Claudius Benedict
Artificial intelligence for imaging-based COVID-19 detection: Systematic review comparing added value of AI versus human readers
title Artificial intelligence for imaging-based COVID-19 detection: Systematic review comparing added value of AI versus human readers
title_full Artificial intelligence for imaging-based COVID-19 detection: Systematic review comparing added value of AI versus human readers
title_fullStr Artificial intelligence for imaging-based COVID-19 detection: Systematic review comparing added value of AI versus human readers
title_full_unstemmed Artificial intelligence for imaging-based COVID-19 detection: Systematic review comparing added value of AI versus human readers
title_short Artificial intelligence for imaging-based COVID-19 detection: Systematic review comparing added value of AI versus human readers
title_sort artificial intelligence for imaging-based covid-19 detection: systematic review comparing added value of ai versus human readers
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8594127/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34839214
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.110028
work_keys_str_mv AT krizachristine artificialintelligenceforimagingbasedcovid19detectionsystematicreviewcomparingaddedvalueofaiversushumanreaders
AT amentavaleria artificialintelligenceforimagingbasedcovid19detectionsystematicreviewcomparingaddedvalueofaiversushumanreaders
AT zeniealexandre artificialintelligenceforimagingbasedcovid19detectionsystematicreviewcomparingaddedvalueofaiversushumanreaders
AT panidisdimitris artificialintelligenceforimagingbasedcovid19detectionsystematicreviewcomparingaddedvalueofaiversushumanreaders
AT chassaignehubert artificialintelligenceforimagingbasedcovid19detectionsystematicreviewcomparingaddedvalueofaiversushumanreaders
AT urbanpatricia artificialintelligenceforimagingbasedcovid19detectionsystematicreviewcomparingaddedvalueofaiversushumanreaders
AT holzwarthuwe artificialintelligenceforimagingbasedcovid19detectionsystematicreviewcomparingaddedvalueofaiversushumanreaders
AT saueraishavanessa artificialintelligenceforimagingbasedcovid19detectionsystematicreviewcomparingaddedvalueofaiversushumanreaders
AT reinavittorio artificialintelligenceforimagingbasedcovid19detectionsystematicreviewcomparingaddedvalueofaiversushumanreaders
AT griesingerclaudiusbenedict artificialintelligenceforimagingbasedcovid19detectionsystematicreviewcomparingaddedvalueofaiversushumanreaders