Paper detail

A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial for Measuring Radiology Study Reporting Time on Artificial Intelligence-Based Detection of Intracranial Hemorrhage in Emergent Care Head CT

We propose Artificial Intelligence Prospective Randomized Observer Blinding Evaluation (AI-PROBE) for quantitative clinical performance evaluation of radiology AI systems within prospective randomized clinical trials. AI-PROBE encompasses a study design and a matching radiology IT infrastructure that randomly blinds radiologists for results provided by AI-based image analysis. To demonstrate the applicability of our evaluation framework, we present a first prospective randomized clinical trial on the effect of Intra-Cranial Hemorrhage (ICH) detection in emergent care head CT on radiology study Turn-Around Time (TAT). Here, we acquired 620 non-contrast head CT scans from inpatient and emergency room patients at a large academic hospital. Following acquisition, scans were automatically analyzed for the presence of ICH using commercially available software (Aidoc, Tel Aviv, Israel). Cases identified positive for ICH by AI (ICH-AI+) were flagged in radiologists&#39; reading worklists, where flagging was randomly switched off with probability 50%. TAT was measured as time difference between study completion and first clinically communicated reporting, with time stamps automatically retrieved from various IT systems. TATs for flagged cases (73+/-143 min) were significantly lower than TATs for non-flagged (132+/-193 min) cases (p<0.05, one-sided t-test), where 105 of 122 ICH-AI+ cases were true positive. Total sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy over all analyzed cases were 95.0%, 96.7%, and 96.4%, respectively. We conclude that automatic identification of ICH reduces TAT for ICH in emergent care head CT, which carries the potential for improving timely clinical management of ICH. Our results suggest that AI-PROBE can contribute to systematic quantitative evaluation of AI systems in clinical practice using clinically meaningful quantities, such as TAT or diagnostic accuracy.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.