Existing trends and applications of artificial intelligence in urothelial cancer A scoping review.

Shamir Malik, Jeremy Wu, Nicole Bodnariuc, Krishnateja Narayana, Naveen Gupta, Mikail Malik, Jethro C C Kwong, Adree Khondker, Alistair E W Johnson, Girish S Kulkarni
{"title":"Existing trends and applications of artificial intelligence in urothelial cancer A scoping review.","authors":"Shamir Malik, Jeremy Wu, Nicole Bodnariuc, Krishnateja Narayana, Naveen Gupta, Mikail Malik, Jethro C C Kwong, Adree Khondker, Alistair E W Johnson, Girish S Kulkarni","doi":"10.5489/cuaj.8322","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in urology is gaining significant traction. While previous reviews of AI applications in urology exist, there have been few attempts to synthesize existing literature on urothelial cancer (UC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Comprehensive searches based on the concepts of \"AI\" and \"urothelial cancer\" were conducted in MEDLINE , EMBASE , Web of Science, and Scopus. Study selection and data abstraction were conducted by two independent reviewers. Two independent raters assessed study quality in a random sample of 25 studies with the prediction model risk of bias assessment tool (PROBAST) and the standardized reporting of machine learning applications in urology (STREAM-URO) framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From a database search of 4581 studies, 227 were included. By area of research, 33% focused on image analysis, 26% on genomics, 16% on radiomics, and 15% on clinicopathology. Thematic content analysis identified qualitative trends in AI models employed and variables for feature extraction. Only 19% of studies compared performance of AI models to non-AI methods. All selected studies demonstrated high risk of bias for analysis and overall concern with Cohen's kappa (k)=0.68. Selected studies met 66% of STREAM-URO items, with k=0.76.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The use of AI in UC is a topic of increasing importance; however, there is a need for improved standardized reporting, as evidenced by the high risk of bias and low methodologic quality identified in the included studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":9574,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada","volume":" ","pages":"E395-E401"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10657228/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.8322","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

Introduction: The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in urology is gaining significant traction. While previous reviews of AI applications in urology exist, there have been few attempts to synthesize existing literature on urothelial cancer (UC).

Methods: Comprehensive searches based on the concepts of "AI" and "urothelial cancer" were conducted in MEDLINE , EMBASE , Web of Science, and Scopus. Study selection and data abstraction were conducted by two independent reviewers. Two independent raters assessed study quality in a random sample of 25 studies with the prediction model risk of bias assessment tool (PROBAST) and the standardized reporting of machine learning applications in urology (STREAM-URO) framework.

Results: From a database search of 4581 studies, 227 were included. By area of research, 33% focused on image analysis, 26% on genomics, 16% on radiomics, and 15% on clinicopathology. Thematic content analysis identified qualitative trends in AI models employed and variables for feature extraction. Only 19% of studies compared performance of AI models to non-AI methods. All selected studies demonstrated high risk of bias for analysis and overall concern with Cohen's kappa (k)=0.68. Selected studies met 66% of STREAM-URO items, with k=0.76.

Conclusions: The use of AI in UC is a topic of increasing importance; however, there is a need for improved standardized reporting, as evidenced by the high risk of bias and low methodologic quality identified in the included studies.

人工智能在尿路上皮癌研究中的现状及应用综述。
导读:人工智能(AI)在泌尿外科的应用越来越受到重视。虽然之前有关于人工智能在泌尿外科应用的综述,但很少有人尝试综合现有的关于尿路上皮癌(UC)的文献。方法:基于“AI”和“尿路上皮癌”的概念在MEDLINE、EMBASE、Web of Science、Scopus中进行综合检索。研究选择和数据提取由两名独立审稿人进行。两名独立评估员使用预测模型偏倚风险评估工具(PROBAST)和机器学习在泌尿科应用的标准化报告(STREAM-URO)框架对25项研究的随机样本进行了研究质量评估。结果:从数据库检索的4581项研究中,纳入227项。按研究领域划分,33%专注于图像分析,26%专注于基因组学,16%专注于放射组学,15%专注于临床病理学。主题内容分析确定了所采用的人工智能模型和特征提取变量的定性趋势。只有19%的研究将人工智能模型的性能与非人工智能方法进行了比较。所有入选的研究均显示分析偏倚风险高,总体关注Cohen’s kappa (k)=0.68。所选研究满足66%的STREAM-URO项目,k=0.76。结论:人工智能在UC中的应用是一个越来越重要的话题;然而,有必要改进标准化报告,正如纳入研究中发现的高偏倚风险和低方法学质量所证明的那样。
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