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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |