提高人工智能观察者训练结直肠癌注释效率的方法。

IF 1.4 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Matthew Grudza, Brandon Salinel, Sarah Zeien, Matthew Murphy, Jake Adkins, Corey T Jensen, Curtis Bay, Vikram Kodibagkar, Phillip Koo, Tomislav Dragovich, Michael A Choti, Madappa Kundranda, Tanveer Syeda-Mahmood, Hong-Zhi Wang, John Chang
{"title":"提高人工智能观察者训练结直肠癌注释效率的方法。","authors":"Matthew Grudza, Brandon Salinel, Sarah Zeien, Matthew Murphy, Jake Adkins, Corey T Jensen, Curtis Bay, Vikram Kodibagkar, Phillip Koo, Tomislav Dragovich, Michael A Choti, Madappa Kundranda, Tanveer Syeda-Mahmood, Hong-Zhi Wang, John Chang","doi":"10.4329/wjr.v15.i12.359","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Missing occult cancer lesions accounts for the most diagnostic errors in retrospective radiology reviews as early cancer can be small or subtle, making the lesions difficult to detect. Second-observer is the most effective technique for reducing these events and can be economically implemented with the advent of artificial intelligence (AI).</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To achieve appropriate AI model training, a large annotated dataset is necessary to train the AI models. Our goal in this research is to compare two methods for decreasing the annotation time to establish ground truth: Skip-slice annotation and AI-initiated annotation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed a 2D U-Net as an AI second observer for detecting colorectal cancer (CRC) and an ensemble of 5 differently initiated 2D U-Net for ensemble technique. Each model was trained with 51 cases of annotated CRC computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis, tested with 7 cases, and validated with 20 cases from The Cancer Imaging Archive cases. The sensitivity, false positives per case, and estimated Dice coefficient were obtained for each method of training. We compared the two methods of annotations and the time reduction associated with the technique. The time differences were tested using Friedman's two-way analysis of variance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sparse annotation significantly reduces the time for annotation particularly skipping 2 slices at a time (<i>P</i> < 0.001). Reduction of up to 2/3 of the annotation does not reduce AI model sensitivity or false positives per case. Although initializing human annotation with AI reduces the annotation time, the reduction is minimal, even when using an ensemble AI to decrease false positives.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our data support the sparse annotation technique as an efficient technique for reducing the time needed to establish the ground truth.</p>","PeriodicalId":23819,"journal":{"name":"World journal of radiology","volume":"15 12","pages":"359-369"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10762523/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Methods for improving colorectal cancer annotation efficiency for artificial intelligence-observer training.\",\"authors\":\"Matthew Grudza, Brandon Salinel, Sarah Zeien, Matthew Murphy, Jake Adkins, Corey T Jensen, Curtis Bay, Vikram Kodibagkar, Phillip Koo, Tomislav Dragovich, Michael A Choti, Madappa Kundranda, Tanveer Syeda-Mahmood, Hong-Zhi Wang, John Chang\",\"doi\":\"10.4329/wjr.v15.i12.359\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Missing occult cancer lesions accounts for the most diagnostic errors in retrospective radiology reviews as early cancer can be small or subtle, making the lesions difficult to detect. Second-observer is the most effective technique for reducing these events and can be economically implemented with the advent of artificial intelligence (AI).</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To achieve appropriate AI model training, a large annotated dataset is necessary to train the AI models. Our goal in this research is to compare two methods for decreasing the annotation time to establish ground truth: Skip-slice annotation and AI-initiated annotation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed a 2D U-Net as an AI second observer for detecting colorectal cancer (CRC) and an ensemble of 5 differently initiated 2D U-Net for ensemble technique. Each model was trained with 51 cases of annotated CRC computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis, tested with 7 cases, and validated with 20 cases from The Cancer Imaging Archive cases. The sensitivity, false positives per case, and estimated Dice coefficient were obtained for each method of training. We compared the two methods of annotations and the time reduction associated with the technique. The time differences were tested using Friedman's two-way analysis of variance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sparse annotation significantly reduces the time for annotation particularly skipping 2 slices at a time (<i>P</i> < 0.001). Reduction of up to 2/3 of the annotation does not reduce AI model sensitivity or false positives per case. Although initializing human annotation with AI reduces the annotation time, the reduction is minimal, even when using an ensemble AI to decrease false positives.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our data support the sparse annotation technique as an efficient technique for reducing the time needed to establish the ground truth.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23819,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World journal of radiology\",\"volume\":\"15 12\",\"pages\":\"359-369\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10762523/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World journal of radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4329/wjr.v15.i12.359\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World journal of radiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4329/wjr.v15.i12.359","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在回顾性放射学审查中,遗漏隐匿性癌症病灶是最常见的诊断错误,因为早期癌症可能很小或很隐蔽,使病灶难以发现。第二观察者是减少这些事件的最有效技术,而且随着人工智能(AI)的出现,可以经济地实现第二观察者。我们的研究目标是比较两种缩短标注时间以建立地面实况的方法:跳过切片标注和人工智能启动标注:我们开发了一个二维 U-Net 作为检测结直肠癌(CRC)的人工智能第二观察者,并开发了一个由 5 个不同启动方式的二维 U-Net 组成的集合,用于集合技术。每个模型都用 51 例注释过的腹部和盆腔 CRC 计算机断层扫描图像进行了训练,用 7 例进行了测试,并用癌症成像档案中的 20 例进行了验证。得出了每种训练方法的灵敏度、每个病例的误报率和估计的 Dice 系数。我们比较了两种注释方法以及与该技术相关的时间缩减。我们使用弗里德曼双向方差分析对时间差异进行了检验:结果:稀疏标注大大缩短了标注时间,尤其是每次跳过 2 个切片(P < 0.001)。减少多达 2/3 的注释并不会降低人工智能模型的灵敏度或每个病例的误报率。虽然用人工智能初始化人类注释可以减少注释时间,但减少的时间极少,即使使用集合人工智能来减少误报也是如此:我们的数据支持稀疏注释技术,认为它是减少建立基本事实所需时间的有效技术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Methods for improving colorectal cancer annotation efficiency for artificial intelligence-observer training.

Background: Missing occult cancer lesions accounts for the most diagnostic errors in retrospective radiology reviews as early cancer can be small or subtle, making the lesions difficult to detect. Second-observer is the most effective technique for reducing these events and can be economically implemented with the advent of artificial intelligence (AI).

Aim: To achieve appropriate AI model training, a large annotated dataset is necessary to train the AI models. Our goal in this research is to compare two methods for decreasing the annotation time to establish ground truth: Skip-slice annotation and AI-initiated annotation.

Methods: We developed a 2D U-Net as an AI second observer for detecting colorectal cancer (CRC) and an ensemble of 5 differently initiated 2D U-Net for ensemble technique. Each model was trained with 51 cases of annotated CRC computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis, tested with 7 cases, and validated with 20 cases from The Cancer Imaging Archive cases. The sensitivity, false positives per case, and estimated Dice coefficient were obtained for each method of training. We compared the two methods of annotations and the time reduction associated with the technique. The time differences were tested using Friedman's two-way analysis of variance.

Results: Sparse annotation significantly reduces the time for annotation particularly skipping 2 slices at a time (P < 0.001). Reduction of up to 2/3 of the annotation does not reduce AI model sensitivity or false positives per case. Although initializing human annotation with AI reduces the annotation time, the reduction is minimal, even when using an ensemble AI to decrease false positives.

Conclusion: Our data support the sparse annotation technique as an efficient technique for reducing the time needed to establish the ground truth.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
World journal of radiology
World journal of radiology RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
自引率
8.00%
发文量
35
×
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