Artificial intelligence algorithm improves radiologists' bone age assessment accuracy artificial intelligence algorithm improves radiologists' bone age assessment accuracy.

Tien-Yu Chang, Ting Ywan Chou, I-An Jen, Yeong-Seng Yuh
{"title":"Artificial intelligence algorithm improves radiologists' bone age assessment accuracy artificial intelligence algorithm improves radiologists' bone age assessment accuracy.","authors":"Tien-Yu Chang, Ting Ywan Chou, I-An Jen, Yeong-Seng Yuh","doi":"10.1097/JCMA.0000000000001248","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms can provide rapid and precise radiographic bone age (BA) assessment. This study assessed the effects of an AI algorithm on the BA assessment performance of radiologists, and evaluated how automation bias could affect radiologists.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective randomized crossover study, six radiologists with varying levels of experience (senior, mi-level, and junior) assessed cases from a test set of 200 standard BA radiographs. The test set was equally divided into two subsets: datasets A and B. Each radiologist assessed BA independently without AI assistance (A- B-) and with AI assistance (A+ B+). We used the mean of assessments made by two experts as the ground truth for accuracy assessment; subsequently, we calculated the mean absolute difference (MAD) between the radiologists' BA predictions and ground-truth BA and evaluated the proportion of estimates for which the MAD exceeded one year. Additionally, we compared the radiologists' performance under conditions of early AI assistance with their performance under conditions of delayed AI assistance; the radiologists were allowed to reject AI interpretations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall accuracy of senior, mid-level, and junior radiologists improved significantly with AI assistance than without AI assistance (MAD: 0.74 vs. 0.46 years, p < 0.001; proportion of assessments for which MAD exceeded 1 year: 24.0% vs. 8.4%, p < 0.001). The proportion of improved BA predictions with AI assistance (16.8%) was significantly higher than that of less accurate predictions with AI assistance (2.3%; p < 0.001). No consistent timing effect was observed between conditions of early and delayed AI assistance. Most disagreements between radiologists and AI occurred over images for patients aged ≤8 years. Senior radiologists had more disagreements than other radiologists.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The AI algorithm improved the BA assessment accuracy of radiologists with varying experience levels. Automation bias was prone to affect less experienced radiologists.</p>","PeriodicalId":94115,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JCMA.0000000000001248","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms can provide rapid and precise radiographic bone age (BA) assessment. This study assessed the effects of an AI algorithm on the BA assessment performance of radiologists, and evaluated how automation bias could affect radiologists.

Methods: In this prospective randomized crossover study, six radiologists with varying levels of experience (senior, mi-level, and junior) assessed cases from a test set of 200 standard BA radiographs. The test set was equally divided into two subsets: datasets A and B. Each radiologist assessed BA independently without AI assistance (A- B-) and with AI assistance (A+ B+). We used the mean of assessments made by two experts as the ground truth for accuracy assessment; subsequently, we calculated the mean absolute difference (MAD) between the radiologists' BA predictions and ground-truth BA and evaluated the proportion of estimates for which the MAD exceeded one year. Additionally, we compared the radiologists' performance under conditions of early AI assistance with their performance under conditions of delayed AI assistance; the radiologists were allowed to reject AI interpretations.

Results: The overall accuracy of senior, mid-level, and junior radiologists improved significantly with AI assistance than without AI assistance (MAD: 0.74 vs. 0.46 years, p < 0.001; proportion of assessments for which MAD exceeded 1 year: 24.0% vs. 8.4%, p < 0.001). The proportion of improved BA predictions with AI assistance (16.8%) was significantly higher than that of less accurate predictions with AI assistance (2.3%; p < 0.001). No consistent timing effect was observed between conditions of early and delayed AI assistance. Most disagreements between radiologists and AI occurred over images for patients aged ≤8 years. Senior radiologists had more disagreements than other radiologists.

Conclusion: The AI algorithm improved the BA assessment accuracy of radiologists with varying experience levels. Automation bias was prone to affect less experienced radiologists.

人工智能算法提高放射科医师骨龄评估准确率人工智能算法提高放射科医师骨龄评估准确率
背景:人工智能(AI)算法可以提供快速、精确的放射学骨龄(BA)评估。本研究评估了人工智能算法对放射科医生的BA评估绩效的影响,并评估了自动化偏见如何影响放射科医生。方法:在这项前瞻性随机交叉研究中,六位具有不同经验水平(高级、中级和初级)的放射科医生对200张标准BA x线片中的病例进行了评估。测试集平均分为两个子集:数据集A和B。每个放射科医生在没有人工智能辅助(A- B-)和人工智能辅助(A+ B+)的情况下独立评估BA。我们使用两位专家评估的平均值作为准确性评估的基础真值;随后,我们计算了放射科医生的BA预测和实际BA之间的平均绝对差(MAD),并评估了MAD超过一年的估计比例。此外,我们比较了放射科医生在早期人工智能辅助条件下的表现与延迟人工智能辅助条件下的表现;放射科医生被允许拒绝人工智能的解释。结果:在人工智能辅助下,高级、中级和初级放射科医生的总体准确率显著提高(MAD: 0.74 vs. 0.46年,p < 0.001;MAD超过1年的评估比例:24.0%对8.4%,p < 0.001)。人工智能辅助下改进的BA预测比例(16.8%)显著高于人工智能辅助下不太准确的预测比例(2.3%;P < 0.001)。在早期和延迟的人工智能援助条件之间没有观察到一致的时间效应。放射科医生和人工智能之间的大多数分歧发生在≤8岁患者的图像上。高级放射科医生比其他放射科医生有更多的分歧。结论:人工智能算法提高了不同经验水平放射科医师BA评估的准确性。自动化偏见容易影响经验不足的放射科医生。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信