.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Return
Artificial Intelligence Using Open Source BI-RADS Data Exemplifying Potential Future Use
.png){kind=icon}
OA
AI
DOI：10.1016/j.jacr.2018.09.040.png)
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Share.png){kind=icon}
Save
Abstract
En 中文
Objectives: With much hype about artificial intelligence (AI) rendering radiologists redundant, a simple radiologist-augmented AI workflow is evaluated; the premise is that inclusion of a radiologist's opinion into an AI algorithm would make the algorithm achieve better accuracy than an algorithm trained on imaging parameters alone. Open-source BI-RADS data sets were evaluated to see whether inclusion of a radiologist's opinion (in the form of BI-RADS classification) in addition to image parameters improved the accuracy of prediction of histology using three machine learning algorithms vis-a-vis algorithms using image parameters alone. Materials and Methods: BI-RADS data sets were obtained from the University of California, Irvine Machine Learning Repository (data set 1) and the Digital Database for Screening Mammography repository (data set 2); three machine learning algorithms were trained using 10-fold cross-validation. Two sets of models were trained: M1, using lesion shape, margin, density, and patient age for data set 1 and image texture parameters for data set 2, and M2, using the previous image parameters and the BI-RADS classification provided by radiologists. The area under the curve and the Gini coefficient for M1 and M2 were compared for the validation data set. Results: The models using the radiologist-provided BI-RADS classification performed significantly better than the models not using them (P < .0001). Conclusion: AI and radiologist working together can achieve better results, helping in case-based decision making. Further evaluation of the metrics involved in predictor handling by AI algorithms will provide newer insights into imaging.
Keywords:
Artificial intelligence
machine learning
radiologist-augmented workflow
BI-RADS
AI Summary
Key information extracted from the uploaded paper, including a brief overview, abstract, background, key highlights, visual analysis, and future outlook.
Journal
IF:
5.1
Papers:
5.5K
Citations:
8.0K