• Login
    View Item 
    •   RD&E Research Repository Home
    • All RD&E publications by year
    • 2022 Eastern publications
    • View Item
    •   RD&E Research Repository Home
    • All RD&E publications by year
    • 2022 Eastern publications
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    157 Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence Models Used in Cross-Sectional Radiological Imaging of Surgical Pathology in the Abdominopelvic Cavity: A Systematic Review

    Thumbnail
    URI
    https://rde.dspace-express.com/handle/11287/622446
    Author
    Fowler, G.E.
    Blencowe, N.S.
    Hardacre, C.
    Callaway, M.P.
    Smart, N.J.
    Macefield, R.C.
    Date
    2022-02-28
    Journal
    British Journal of Surgery
    Type
    Conference Paper
    Publisher
    Wiley
    DOI
    10.1093/bjs/znac040.015
    Rights
    © 2022, Oxford University Press
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Medical imaging is important for diagnostic, prognostic, and management decisions. It is reliant on an increasingly limited number of interpreters. A developing interest has explored how artificial intelligence (AI) research in medical imaging can support clinicians and provide greater efficiency in clinical care. Reviews exist for thoracic and endoscopic imaging, but one is lacking for the abdominopelvic cavity. This could benefit several specialities which use this modality of imaging to guide their clinical decision making. This systematic review examines and critically appraises the application of AI models to identify surgical pathology from cross-sectional radiological images of the abdominopelvic cavity, to identify current limitations and inform future research.Systematic database searches (Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) to identify relevant studies were performed, adhering to the PRISMA-DTA guidelines. Study characteristics and outcomes assessing diagnostic performance were extracted. A narrative synthesis was performed in accordance with the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis guidelines.10 retrospective studies were included, comprising 3,096 and 1,432 patients for AI training and test sets, respectively. There was diversity in the speciality, intention of the AI applications and the reporting, which was unstandardised. Diagnostic performance of models varied (range: 70–95% sensitivity, 73.7%-98% specificity). Only one study used a comparator, in which AI (AUC=0.920) outperformed both senior and junior radiologists (AUC=0.791 and 0.780, respectively).AI application in this field is diverse and adherence to new and developing reporting guidelines is warranted. With finite healthcare resources and funding, future endeavours may benefit from prioritising clinical need, rather than scientific inquiry.
    Publisher URL
    https://academic.oup.com/bjs/article/109/Supplement_1/znac040.015/6539425
    Note
    RD&E staff can access the full-text of this article by clicking on the 'Additional Link' above and logging in with NHS OpenAthens if prompted.
    Collections
    • 2022 Eastern publications
    • General Surgery

    Browse

    All of RD&E Research RepositoryCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2023  DuraSpace
    Contact Us | Send Feedback
    DSpace Express is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV