Systematic review with meta-analysis: artificial intelligence in the diagnosis of oesophageal diseases.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Artificial intelligence (AI) has recently been applied to endoscopy and questionnaires for the evaluation of oesophageal diseases (ODs).Aim
We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis to evaluate the performance of AI in the diagnosis of malignant and benign OD.Methods
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMBASE Classic and the Cochrane Library. A bivariate random-effect model was used to calculate pooled diagnostic efficacy of AI models and endoscopists. The reference tests were histology for neoplasms and the clinical and instrumental diagnosis for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The pooled area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (AUROC), sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio (PLR and NLR) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were estimated.Results
For the diagnosis of Barrett's neoplasia, AI had AUROC of 0.90, sensitivity 0.89, specificity 0.86, PLR 6.50, NLR 0.13 and DOR 50.53. AI models' performance was comparable with that of endoscopists (P = 0.35). For the diagnosis of oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma, the AUROC, sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR and DOR were 0.97, 0.95, 0.92, 12.65, 0.05 and DOR 258.36, respectively. In this task, AI performed better than endoscopists although without statistically significant differences. In the detection of abnormal intrapapillary capillary loops, the performance of AI was: AUROC 0.98, sensitivity 0.94, specificity 0.94, PLR 14.75, NLR 0.07 and DOR 225.83. For the diagnosis of GERD based on questionnaires, the AUROC, sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR and DOR were 0.99, 0.97, 0.97, 38.26, 0.03 and 1159.6, respectively.Conclusions
AI demonstrated high performance in the clinical and endoscopic diagnosis of OD.
SUBMITTER: Visaggi P
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9305819 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:The aim was to systematically synthesize the current research and influence of artificial intelligence (AI) models on temporomandibular joint (TMJ) osteoarthritis (OA) diagnosis using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) or panoramic radiography. Seven databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, ProQuest, and SpringerLink) were searched for TMJ OA and AI articles. We used QUADAS-2 to assess the risk of bias, while with MI-CLAIM we checked the minimum information about clinical artificial intelligence modeling. Two hundred and three records were identified, out of which seven were included, amounting to 10,077 TMJ images. Three studies focused on the diagnosis of TMJ OA using panoramic radiography with various transfer learning models (ResNet model) on which the meta-analysis was performed. The pooled sensitivity was 0.76 (95% CI 0.35–0.95) and the specificity was 0.79 (95% CI 0.75–0.83). The other studies investigated the 3D shape of the condyle and disease classification observed on CBCT images, as well as the numerous radiomics features that can be combined with clinical and proteomic data to investigate the most effective models and promising features for the diagnosis of TMJ OA. The accuracy of the methods was nearly equivalent; it was higher when the indeterminate diagnosis was excluded or when fine-tuning was used.
| S-EPMC9918072 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe gold standard for the diagnosis of liver fibrosis and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is liver biopsy. Various noninvasive modalities, e.g., ultrasonography, elastography and clinical predictive scores, have been used as alternatives to liver biopsy, with limited performance. Recently, artificial intelligence (AI) models have been developed and integrated into noninvasive diagnostic tools to improve their performance.MethodsWe systematically searched for studies on AI-assisted diagnosis of liver fibrosis and NAFLD on MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using a random effects model. A summary receiver operating characteristic curve and the area under the curve was generated to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the AI-assisted system. Subgroup analyses by diagnostic modalities, population and AI classifiers were performed.ResultsWe included 19 studies reporting the performances of AI-assisted ultrasonography, elastrography, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and clinical parameters for the diagnosis of liver fibrosis and steatosis. For the diagnosis of liver fibrosis, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and DOR were 0.78 (0.71-0.85), 0.89 (0.81-0.94), 0.72 (0.58-0.83), 0.92 (0.88-0.94) and 31.58 (11.84-84.25), respectively, for cirrhosis; 0.86 (0.80-0.90), 0.87 (0.80-0.92), 0.85 (0.75-0.91), 0.88 (0.82-0.92) and 37.79 (16.01-89.19), respectively; for advanced fibrosis; and 0.86 (0.78-0.92), 0.81 (0.77-0.84), 0.88 (0.80-0.93), 0.77 (0.58-0.89) and 26.79 (14.47-49.62), respectively, for significant fibrosis. Subgroup analyses showed significant differences in performance for the diagnosis of fibrosis among different modalities. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and DOR were 0.97 (0.76-1.00), 0.91 (0.78-0.97), 0.95 (0.87-0.98), 0.93 (0.80-0.98) and 191.52 (38.82-944.81), respectively, for the diagnosis of liver steatosis.ConclusionsAI-assisted systems have promising potential for the diagnosis of liver fibrosis and NAFLD. Validations of their performances are warranted before implementing these AI-assisted systems in clinical practice.Trial registrationThe protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020183295).
| S-EPMC7788739 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) algorithms have been applied to diagnose temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). However, studies have used different patient selection criteria, disease subtypes, input data, and outcome measures. Resultantly, the performance of the AI models varies.ObjectiveThis study aimed to systematically summarize the current literature on the application of AI technologies for diagnosis of different TMD subtypes, evaluate the quality of these studies, and assess the diagnostic accuracy of existing AI models.Materials and methodsThe study protocol was carried out based on the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA). The PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched to find relevant articles from database inception to June 2022. Studies that used AI algorithms to diagnose at least one subtype of TMD and those that assessed the performance of AI algorithms were included. We excluded studies on orofacial pain that were not directly related to the TMD, such as studies on atypical facial pain and neuropathic pain, editorials, book chapters, and excerpts without detailed empirical data. The risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. We used Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) to provide certainty of evidence.ResultsA total of 17 articles for automated diagnosis of masticatory muscle disorders, TMJ osteoarthrosis, internal derangement, and disc perforation were included; they were retrospective studies, case-control studies, cohort studies, and a pilot study. Seven studies were subjected to a meta-analysis for diagnostic accuracy. According to the GRADE, the certainty of evidence was very low. The performance of the AI models had accuracy and specificity ranging from 84% to 99.9% and 73% to 100%, respectively. The pooled accuracy was 0.91 (95% CI 0.76-0.99), I2 = 97% (95% CI 0.96-0.98), p < 0.001.ConclusionsVarious AI algorithms developed for diagnosing TMDs may provide additional clinical expertise to increase diagnostic accuracy. However, it should be noted that a high risk of bias was present in the included studies. Also, certainty of evidence was very low. Future research of higher quality is strongly recommended.
| S-EPMC9387829 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe electrocardiogram (ECG) is an inexpensive and easily accessible investigation for the diagnosis of cardiovascular diseases including heart failure (HF). The application of artificial intelligence (AI) has contributed to clinical practice in terms of aiding diagnosis, prognosis, risk stratification and guiding clinical management. The aim of this study is to systematically review and perform a meta-analysis of published studies on the application of AI for HF detection based on the ECG.MethodsWe searched Embase, PubMed and Web of Science databases to identify literature using AI for HF detection based on ECG data. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) criteria. Random-effects models were used for calculating the effect estimates and hierarchical receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted. Subgroup analysis was performed. Heterogeneity and the risk of bias were also assessed.ResultsA total of 11 studies including 104,737 subjects were included. The area under the curve for HF diagnosis was 0.986, with a corresponding pooled sensitivity of 0.95 (95% CI: 0.86-0.98), specificity of 0.98 (95% CI: 0.95-0.99) and diagnostic odds ratio of 831.51 (95% CI: 127.85-5407.74). In the patient selection domain of QUADAS-2, eight studies were designated as high risk.ConclusionsAccording to the available evidence, the incorporation of AI can aid the diagnosis of HF. However, there is heterogeneity among machine learning algorithms and improvements are required in terms of quality and study design.
| S-EPMC9807402 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a fatal disease and has become a burden on the global health system. Recent studies have suggested that artificial intelligence (AI) could be used to make a diagnosis and predict venous thrombosis more accurately. Thus, we performed a meta-analysis to better evaluate the performance of AI in the prediction and diagnosis of venous thrombosis. PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE were used to identify relevant studies. Of the 741 studies, 12 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Among them, 5 studies included a training set and test set, and 7 studies included only a training set. In the training set, the pooled sensitivity was 0.87 (95% CI 0.79-0.92), the pooled specificity was 0.95 (95% CI 0.89-0.97), and the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was 0.97 (95% CI 0.95-0.98). In the test set, the pooled sensitivity was 0.87 (95% CI 0.74-0.93), the pooled specificity was 0.96 (95% CI 0.79-0.99), and the area under the SROC curve was 0.98 (95% CI 0.97-0.99). The combined results remained significant in the subgroup analyzes, which included venous thrombosis type, AI type, model type (diagnosis/prediction), and whether the period was perioperative. In conclusion, AI may aid in the diagnosis and prediction of venous thrombosis, demonstrating high sensitivity, specificity and area under the SROC curve values. Thus, AI has important clinical value.
| S-EPMC8246532 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Artificial intelligence (AI) is a major branch of computer science that is fruitfully used for analyzing complex medical data and extracting meaningful relationships in datasets, for several clinical aims. Specifically, in the brain care domain, several innovative approaches have achieved remarkable results and open new perspectives in terms of diagnosis, planning, and outcome prediction. In this work, we present an overview of different artificial intelligent techniques used in the brain care domain, along with a review of important clinical applications. A systematic and careful literature search in major databases such as Pubmed, Scopus, and Web of Science was carried out using "artificial intelligence" and "brain" as main keywords. Further references were integrated by cross-referencing from key articles. 155 studies out of 2696 were identified, which actually made use of AI algorithms for different purposes (diagnosis, surgical treatment, intra-operative assistance, and postoperative assessment). Artificial neural networks have risen to prominent positions among the most widely used analytical tools. Classic machine learning approaches such as support vector machine and random forest are still widely used. Task-specific algorithms are designed for solving specific problems. Brain images are one of the most used data types. AI has the possibility to improve clinicians' decision-making ability in neuroscience applications. However, major issues still need to be addressed for a better practical use of AI in the brain. To this aim, it is important to both gather comprehensive data and build explainable AI algorithms.
| S-EPMC7556883 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeSeveral artificial intelligence (AI) models for the detection and prediction of cardiovascular-related diseases, including arrhythmias, diabetes, and sleep apnea, have been reported. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify AI models developed for or applicable to wearable and mobile devices for diverse cardiovascular-related diseases.Materials and methodsThe searched databases included Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library. For AI models for atrial fibrillation (AF) detection, a meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy was performed to summarize sensitivity and specificity.ResultsA total of 102 studies were included in the qualitative review. There were AI models for the detection of arrythmia (n=62), followed by sleep apnea (n=11), peripheral vascular diseases (n=6), diabetes mellitus (n=5), hyper/hypotension (n=5), valvular heart disease (n=4), heart failure (n=3), myocardial infarction and cardiac arrest (n=2), and others (n=4). For quantitative analysis of 26 studies reporting AI models for AF detection, meta-analyzed sensitivity was 94.80% and specificity was 96.96%. Deep neural networks showed superior performance [meta-analyzed area under receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) of 0.981] compared to conventional machine learning algorithms (meta-analyzed AUROC of 0.961). However, AI models tested with proprietary dataset (meta-analyzed AUROC of 0.972) or data acquired from wearable devices (meta-analyzed AUROC of 0.977) showed inferior performance than those with public dataset (meta-analyzed AUROC of 0.986) or data from in-hospital devices (meta-analyzed AUROC of 0.983).ConclusionThis review found that AI models for diverse cardiovascular-related diseases are being developed, and that they are gradually developing into a form that is suitable for wearable and mobile devices.
| S-EPMC8790582 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Lung cancer is a common malignant tumor disease with high clinical disability and death rates. Currently, lung cancer diagnosis mainly relies on manual pathology section analysis, but the low efficiency and subjective nature of manual film reading can lead to certain misdiagnoses and omissions. With the continuous development of science and technology, artificial intelligence (AI) has been gradually applied to imaging diagnosis. Although there are reports on AI-assisted lung cancer diagnosis, there are still problems such as small sample size and untimely data updates. Therefore, in this study, a large amount of recent data was included, and meta-analysis was used to evaluate the value of AI for lung cancer diagnosis. With the help of STATA16.0, the value of AI-assisted lung cancer diagnosis was assessed by specificity, sensitivity, negative likelihood ratio, positive likelihood ratio, diagnostic ratio, and plotting the working characteristic curves of subjects. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis were used to investigate the value of AI-assisted lung cancer diagnosis. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the combined sensitivity of the AI-aided diagnosis system for lung cancer diagnosis was 0.87 [95% CI (0.82, 0.90)], specificity was 0.87 [95% CI (0.82, 0.91)] (CI stands for confidence interval.), the missed diagnosis rate was 13%, the misdiagnosis rate was 13%, the positive likelihood ratio was 6.5 [95% CI (4.6, 9.3)], the negative likelihood ratio was 0.15 [95% CI (0.11, 0.21)], a diagnostic ratio of 43 [95% CI (24, 76)] and a sum of area under the combined subject operating characteristic (SROC) curve of 0.93 [95% CI (0.91, 0.95)]. Based on the results, the AI-assisted diagnostic system for CT (Computerized Tomography), imaging has considerable diagnostic accuracy for lung cancer diagnosis, which is of significant value for lung cancer diagnosis and has greater feasibility of realizing the extension application in the field of clinical diagnosis.
| S-EPMC10035910 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) has been extensively used in a range of medical fields to promote therapeutic development. The development of diverse AI techniques has also contributed to early detections, disease diagnoses, and referral management. However, concerns about the value of advanced AI in disease diagnosis have been raised by health care professionals, medical service providers, and health policy decision makers.ObjectiveThis review aimed to systematically examine the literature, in particular, focusing on the performance comparison between advanced AI and human clinicians to provide an up-to-date summary regarding the extent of the application of AI to disease diagnoses. By doing so, this review discussed the relationship between the current advanced AI development and clinicians with respect to disease diagnosis and thus therapeutic development in the long run.MethodsWe systematically searched articles published between January 2000 and March 2019 following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis in the following databases: Scopus, PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. According to the preset inclusion and exclusion criteria, only articles comparing the medical performance between advanced AI and human experts were considered.ResultsA total of 9 articles were identified. A convolutional neural network was the commonly applied advanced AI technology. Owing to the variation in medical fields, there is a distinction between individual studies in terms of classification, labeling, training process, dataset size, and algorithm validation of AI. Performance indices reported in articles included diagnostic accuracy, weighted errors, false-positive rate, sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. The results showed that the performance of AI was at par with that of clinicians and exceeded that of clinicians with less experience.ConclusionsCurrent AI development has a diagnostic performance that is comparable with medical experts, especially in image recognition-related fields. Further studies can be extended to other types of medical imaging such as magnetic resonance imaging and other medical practices unrelated to images. With the continued development of AI-assisted technologies, the clinical implications underpinned by clinicians' experience and guided by patient-centered health care principle should be constantly considered in future AI-related and other technology-based medical research.
| S-EPMC6716335 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Because it is an accessible and routine image test, medical personnel commonly use a chest X-ray for COVID-19 infections. Artificial intelligence (AI) is now widely applied to improve the precision of routine image tests. Hence, we investigated the clinical merit of the chest X-ray to detect COVID-19 when assisted by AI. We used PubMed, Cochrane Library, MedRxiv, ArXiv, and Embase to search for relevant research published between 1 January 2020 and 30 May 2022. We collected essays that dissected AI-based measures used for patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and excluded research lacking measurements using relevant parameters (i.e., sensitivity, specificity, and area under curve). Two independent researchers summarized the information, and discords were eliminated by consensus. A random effects model was used to calculate the pooled sensitivities and specificities. The sensitivity of the included research studies was enhanced by eliminating research with possible heterogeneity. A summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) was generated to investigate the diagnostic value for detecting COVID-19 patients. Nine studies were recruited in this analysis, including 39,603 subjects. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were estimated as 0.9472 (p = 0.0338, 95% CI 0.9009-0.9959) and 0.9610 (p < 0.0001, 95% CI 0.9428-0.9795), respectively. The area under the SROC was 0.98 (95% CI 0.94-1.00). The heterogeneity of diagnostic odds ratio was presented in the recruited studies (I2 = 36.212, p = 0.129). The AI-assisted chest X-ray scan for COVID-19 detection offered excellent diagnostic potential and broader application.
| S-EPMC9955250 | biostudies-literature