Dataset Information

Radiology artificial intelligence, a systematic evaluation of methods (RAISE): a systematic review protocol.

ABSTRACT: Introduction: There has been a recent explosion of research into the field of artificial intelligence as applied to clinical radiology with the advent of highly accurate computer vision technology. These studies, however, vary significantly in design and quality. While recent guidelines have been established to advise on ethics, data management and the potential directions of future research, systematic reviews of the entire field are lacking. We aim to investigate the use of artificial intelligence as applied to radiology, to identify the clinical questions being asked, which methodological approaches are applied to these questions and trends in use over time.

Methods and analysis: We will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and by the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook. We will perform a literature search through MEDLINE (Pubmed), and EMBASE, a detailed data extraction of trial characteristics and a narrative synthesis of the data. There will be no language restrictions. We will take a task-centred approach rather than focusing on modality or clinical subspecialty. Sub-group analysis will be performed by segmentation tasks, identification tasks, classification tasks, pegression/prediction tasks as well as a sub-analysis for paediatric patients.

Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval will not be required for this study, as data will be obtained from publicly available clinical trials. We will disseminate our results in a peer-reviewed publication. Registration number PROSPERO: CRD42020154790.

SUBMITTER: Kelly B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7726044 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Radiology artificial intelligence, a systematic evaluation of methods (RAISE): a systematic review protocol.

Kelly Brendan B Judge Conor C Bollard Stephanie M SM Clifford Simon M SM Healy Gerard M GM Yeom Kristen W KW Lawlor Aonghus A Killeen Ronan P RP

Insights into imaging 20201209 1

<h4>Introduction</h4>There has been a recent explosion of research into the field of artificial intelligence as applied to clinical radiology with the advent of highly accurate computer vision technology. These studies, however, vary significantly in design and quality. While recent guidelines have been established to advise on ethics, data management and the potential directions of future research, systematic reviews of the entire field are lacking. We aim to investigate the use of artificial i ...[more]

PMID: 33296033

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThere has been a large amount of research in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) as applied to clinical radiology. However, these studies vary in design and quality and systematic reviews of the entire field are lacking.This systematic review aimed to identify all papers that used deep learning in radiology to survey the literature and to evaluate their methods. We aimed to identify the key questions being addressed in the literature and to identify the most effective methods employed.MethodsWe followed the PRISMA guidelines and performed a systematic review of studies of AI in radiology published from 2015 to 2019. Our published protocol was prospectively registered.ResultsOur search yielded 11,083 results. Seven hundred sixty-seven full texts were reviewed, and 535 articles were included. Ninety-eight percent were retrospective cohort studies. The median number of patients included was 460. Most studies involved MRI (37%). Neuroradiology was the most common subspecialty. Eighty-eight percent used supervised learning. The majority of studies undertook a segmentation task (39%). Performance comparison was with a state-of-the-art model in 37%. The most used established architecture was UNet (14%). The median performance for the most utilised evaluation metrics was Dice of 0.89 (range .49-.99), AUC of 0.903 (range 1.00-0.61) and Accuracy of 89.4 (range 70.2-100). Of the 77 studies that externally validated their results and allowed for direct comparison, performance on average decreased by 6% at external validation (range increase of 4% to decrease 44%).ConclusionThis systematic review has surveyed the major advances in AI as applied to clinical radiology.Key points• While there are many papers reporting expert-level results by using deep learning in radiology, most apply only a narrow range of techniques to a narrow selection of use cases. • The literature is dominated by retrospective cohort studies with limited external validation with high potential for bias. • The recent advent of AI extensions to systematic reporting guidelines and prospective trial registration along with a focus on external validation and explanations show potential for translation of the hype surrounding AI from code to clinic.

Project description:IntroductionPre-eclampsia (PE) is a leading cause of perinatal morbidity and mortality worldwide. Low-dose aspirin can prevent PE in high risk pregnancies if started early. However, despite intense research into the area, early pregnancy screening for PE risk is still not a routine part of pregnancy care. Several studies have described the application of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) in risk prediction of PE and its subtypes. A systematic review of available literature is necessary to catalogue the current applications of AI/ML methods in early pregnancy screening for PE, in order to better inform the development of clinically relevant risk prediction algorithms which will enable timely intervention and the development of new treatment strategies. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and assess studies regarding the application of AI/ML methods in early pregnancy screening for PE.MethodsA systematic review of peer-reviewed as well as the pre-published cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies will be conducted. Relevant information will be accessed from the following databases; PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Arxiv, BioRxiv, and MedRxiv. The studies will be evaluated by two reviewers in a parallel, blind assessment of the literature, a third reviewer will assess any studies in which the first two reviewers did not agree. The free online tool Rayyan, will be used in this literature assessment stage. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 checklist will be used to guide the review process and the methods of the studies will be assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Narrative synthesis will be conducted for all included studies. Meta-analysis will also be conducted where data quality and availability allow.Ethics and disseminationThe review will not require ethical approval and the findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal using the PRISMA guidelines.Trial registrationTrial registration: The protocol for this systematic review has been registered in PROSPERO [CRD42022345786]. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022345786.

Dataset Information

Radiology artificial intelligence, a systematic evaluation of methods (RAISE): a systematic review protocol.

Publications

Radiology artificial intelligence, a systematic evaluation of methods (RAISE): a systematic review protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets