IRUS Total

Diagnostic accuracy of deep learning in medical imaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis

File Description SizeFormat 
s41746-021-00438-z.pdfPublished version984.71 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Title: Diagnostic accuracy of deep learning in medical imaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors: Aggarwal, R
Sounderajah, V
Martin, G
Ting, D
Karthikesalingam, A
King, D
Ashrafian, H
Darzi, A
Item Type: Journal Article
Abstract: Deep learning (DL) has the potential to transform medical diagnostics. However, the diagnostic accuracy of DL is uncertain. Our aim was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of DL algorithms to identify pathology in medical imaging. Searches were conducted in Medline and EMBASE up to January 2020. We identified 11,921 studies, of which 503 were included in the systematic review. Eighty-two studies in ophthalmology, 82 in breast disease and 115 in respiratory disease were included for meta-analysis. Two hundred twenty-four studies in other specialities were included for qualitative review. Peer-reviewed studies that reported on the diagnostic accuracy of DL algorithms to identify pathology using medical imaging were included. Primary outcomes were measures of diagnostic accuracy, study design and reporting standards in the literature. Estimates were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. In ophthalmology, AUC’s ranged between 0.933 and 1 for diagnosing diabetic retinopathy, age-related macular degeneration and glaucoma on retinal fundus photographs and optical coherence tomography. In respiratory imaging, AUC’s ranged between 0.864 and 0.937 for diagnosing lung nodules or lung cancer on chest X-ray or CT scan. For breast imaging, AUC’s ranged between 0.868 and 0.909 for diagnosing breast cancer on mammogram, ultrasound, MRI and digital breast tomosynthesis. Heterogeneity was high between studies and extensive variation in methodology, terminology and outcome measures was noted. This can lead to an overestimation of the diagnostic accuracy of DL algorithms on medical imaging. There is an immediate need for the development of artificial intelligence-specific EQUATOR guidelines, particularly STARD, in order to provide guidance around key issues in this field.
Issue Date: 7-Apr-2021
Date of Acceptance: 12-Feb-2021
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/87912
DOI: 10.1038/s41746-021-00438-z
ISSN: 2398-6352
Publisher: Nature Research
Journal / Book Title: npj Digital Medicine
Volume: 4
Copyright Statement: © The Author(s) 2021. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Sponsor/Funder: National Institute of Health Research
Publication Status: Published
Article Number: ARTN 65
Appears in Collections:Department of Surgery and Cancer
Institute of Global Health Innovation

This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons