Collaboration between explainable artificial intelligence and pulmonologists improves the accuracy of pulmonary function test interpretation
Author(s)
Type
Journal Article
Abstract
Background Few studies have investigated the collaborative potential between artificial intelligence (AI) and pulmonologists for diagnosing pulmonary disease. We hypothesised that the collaboration between a pulmonologist and AI with explanations (explainable AI (XAI)) is superior in diagnostic interpretation of pulmonary function tests (PFTs) than the pulmonologist without support.
Methods The study was conducted in two phases, a monocentre study (phase 1) and a multicentre intervention study (phase 2). Each phase utilised two different sets of 24 PFT reports of patients with a clinically validated gold standard diagnosis. Each PFT was interpreted without (control) and with XAI's suggestions (intervention). Pulmonologists provided a differential diagnosis consisting of a preferential diagnosis and optionally up to three additional diagnoses. The primary end-point compared accuracy of preferential and additional diagnoses between control and intervention. Secondary end-points were the number of diagnoses in differential diagnosis, diagnostic confidence and inter-rater agreement. We also analysed how XAI influenced pulmonologists’ decisions.
Results In phase 1 (n=16 pulmonologists), mean preferential and differential diagnostic accuracy significantly increased by 10.4% and 9.4%, respectively, between control and intervention (p<0.001). Improvements were somewhat lower but highly significant (p<0.0001) in phase 2 (5.4% and 8.7%, respectively; n=62 pulmonologists). In both phases, the number of diagnoses in the differential diagnosis did not reduce, but diagnostic confidence and inter-rater agreement significantly increased during intervention. Pulmonologists updated their decisions with XAI's feedback and consistently improved their baseline performance if AI provided correct predictions.
Conclusion A collaboration between a pulmonologist and XAI is better at interpreting PFTs than individual pulmonologists reading without XAI support or XAI alone.
Methods The study was conducted in two phases, a monocentre study (phase 1) and a multicentre intervention study (phase 2). Each phase utilised two different sets of 24 PFT reports of patients with a clinically validated gold standard diagnosis. Each PFT was interpreted without (control) and with XAI's suggestions (intervention). Pulmonologists provided a differential diagnosis consisting of a preferential diagnosis and optionally up to three additional diagnoses. The primary end-point compared accuracy of preferential and additional diagnoses between control and intervention. Secondary end-points were the number of diagnoses in differential diagnosis, diagnostic confidence and inter-rater agreement. We also analysed how XAI influenced pulmonologists’ decisions.
Results In phase 1 (n=16 pulmonologists), mean preferential and differential diagnostic accuracy significantly increased by 10.4% and 9.4%, respectively, between control and intervention (p<0.001). Improvements were somewhat lower but highly significant (p<0.0001) in phase 2 (5.4% and 8.7%, respectively; n=62 pulmonologists). In both phases, the number of diagnoses in the differential diagnosis did not reduce, but diagnostic confidence and inter-rater agreement significantly increased during intervention. Pulmonologists updated their decisions with XAI's feedback and consistently improved their baseline performance if AI provided correct predictions.
Conclusion A collaboration between a pulmonologist and XAI is better at interpreting PFTs than individual pulmonologists reading without XAI support or XAI alone.
Date Issued
2023-05-01
Date Acceptance
2023-03-09
Citation
European Respiratory Journal, 2023, 61 (5)
ISSN
0903-1936
Publisher
European Respiratory Society
Journal / Book Title
European Respiratory Journal
Volume
61
Issue
5
Copyright Statement
Copyright ©The authors 2023.
This version is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0. For commercial reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions@ersnet.org
This version is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0. For commercial reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions@ersnet.org
License URL
Identifier
https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000999507000009&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=a2bf6146997ec60c407a63945d4e92bb
Subjects
BLACK-BOX
DIAGNOSIS
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Respiratory System
Science & Technology
Publication Status
Published
Article Number
2201720
Date Publish Online
2023-05-18