Cargando…
Reproducibility of artificial intelligence models in computed tomography of the head: a quantitative analysis
When developing artificial intelligence (AI) software for applications in radiology, the underlying research must be transferable to other real-world problems. To verify to what degree this is true, we reviewed research on AI algorithms for computed tomography of the head. A systematic review was co...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Vienna
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9613832/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36303079 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13244-022-01311-7 |
_version_ | 1784820058682294272 |
---|---|
author | Gunzer, Felix Jantscher, Michael Hassler, Eva M. Kau, Thomas Reishofer, Gernot |
author_facet | Gunzer, Felix Jantscher, Michael Hassler, Eva M. Kau, Thomas Reishofer, Gernot |
author_sort | Gunzer, Felix |
collection | PubMed |
description | When developing artificial intelligence (AI) software for applications in radiology, the underlying research must be transferable to other real-world problems. To verify to what degree this is true, we reviewed research on AI algorithms for computed tomography of the head. A systematic review was conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. We identified 83 articles and analyzed them in terms of transparency of data and code, pre-processing, type of algorithm, architecture, hyperparameter, performance measure, and balancing of dataset in relation to epidemiology. We also classified all articles by their main functionality (classification, detection, segmentation, prediction, triage, image reconstruction, image registration, fusion of imaging modalities). We found that only a minority of authors provided open source code (10.15%, n 0 7), making the replication of results difficult. Convolutional neural networks were predominantly used (32.61%, n = 15), whereas hyperparameters were less frequently reported (32.61%, n = 15). Data sets were mostly from single center sources (84.05%, n = 58), increasing the susceptibility of the models to bias, which increases the error rate of the models. The prevalence of brain lesions in the training (0.49 ± 0.30) and testing (0.45 ± 0.29) datasets differed from real-world epidemiology (0.21 ± 0.28), which may overestimate performances. This review highlights the need for open source code, external validation, and consideration of disease prevalence. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13244-022-01311-7. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9613832 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer Vienna |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96138322022-10-29 Reproducibility of artificial intelligence models in computed tomography of the head: a quantitative analysis Gunzer, Felix Jantscher, Michael Hassler, Eva M. Kau, Thomas Reishofer, Gernot Insights Imaging Critical Review When developing artificial intelligence (AI) software for applications in radiology, the underlying research must be transferable to other real-world problems. To verify to what degree this is true, we reviewed research on AI algorithms for computed tomography of the head. A systematic review was conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. We identified 83 articles and analyzed them in terms of transparency of data and code, pre-processing, type of algorithm, architecture, hyperparameter, performance measure, and balancing of dataset in relation to epidemiology. We also classified all articles by their main functionality (classification, detection, segmentation, prediction, triage, image reconstruction, image registration, fusion of imaging modalities). We found that only a minority of authors provided open source code (10.15%, n 0 7), making the replication of results difficult. Convolutional neural networks were predominantly used (32.61%, n = 15), whereas hyperparameters were less frequently reported (32.61%, n = 15). Data sets were mostly from single center sources (84.05%, n = 58), increasing the susceptibility of the models to bias, which increases the error rate of the models. The prevalence of brain lesions in the training (0.49 ± 0.30) and testing (0.45 ± 0.29) datasets differed from real-world epidemiology (0.21 ± 0.28), which may overestimate performances. This review highlights the need for open source code, external validation, and consideration of disease prevalence. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13244-022-01311-7. Springer Vienna 2022-10-27 /pmc/articles/PMC9613832/ /pubmed/36303079 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13244-022-01311-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis 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 | Critical Review Gunzer, Felix Jantscher, Michael Hassler, Eva M. Kau, Thomas Reishofer, Gernot Reproducibility of artificial intelligence models in computed tomography of the head: a quantitative analysis |
title | Reproducibility of artificial intelligence models in computed tomography of the head: a quantitative analysis |
title_full | Reproducibility of artificial intelligence models in computed tomography of the head: a quantitative analysis |
title_fullStr | Reproducibility of artificial intelligence models in computed tomography of the head: a quantitative analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Reproducibility of artificial intelligence models in computed tomography of the head: a quantitative analysis |
title_short | Reproducibility of artificial intelligence models in computed tomography of the head: a quantitative analysis |
title_sort | reproducibility of artificial intelligence models in computed tomography of the head: a quantitative analysis |
topic | Critical Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9613832/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36303079 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13244-022-01311-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gunzerfelix reproducibilityofartificialintelligencemodelsincomputedtomographyoftheheadaquantitativeanalysis AT jantschermichael reproducibilityofartificialintelligencemodelsincomputedtomographyoftheheadaquantitativeanalysis AT hasslerevam reproducibilityofartificialintelligencemodelsincomputedtomographyoftheheadaquantitativeanalysis AT kauthomas reproducibilityofartificialintelligencemodelsincomputedtomographyoftheheadaquantitativeanalysis AT reishofergernot reproducibilityofartificialintelligencemodelsincomputedtomographyoftheheadaquantitativeanalysis |