Diagnostic Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence in Endoscopy: Umbrella Review

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICAL INFORMATICS JMIR Medical Informatics Pub Date : 2024-07-15 DOI:10.2196/56361
Bowen Zha, Angshu Cai, Guiqi Wang
{"title":"Diagnostic Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence in Endoscopy: Umbrella Review","authors":"Bowen Zha, Angshu Cai, Guiqi Wang","doi":"10.2196/56361","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Some research has already reported the diagnostic value of artificial intelligence (AI) in different endoscopy outcomes. However, the evidence is confusing and of varying quality. Objective: To comprehensively evaluate the credibility of the evidence of the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence in endoscopy. Methods: Before the study began, the protocol was registered in the International prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42023483073). Firstly, two researchers searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library using comprehensive search terms. The deadline is November 2023. Then, researchers conduct screening research and extract information. We use A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR2) to evaluate the quality of the article. We choose the research with higher quality evaluation for the same outcome for further analysis. In order to ensure the reliability of the conclusion, we have calculated each outcome again. Finally, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) is used to evaluate the credibility of the outcome. Results: A total of 21 studies were included for analysis. Through AMSTAR2, it was found that eight research methodologies were of moderate quality, while other studies were regarded as low or critical low. The sensitivity and specificity of 17 different outcomes were analyzed. There are four different outcomes related to the esophagus, stomach, and colorectal, respectively. Two outcomes are associated with capsule endoscopy and laryngoscope, respectively. While the other is related to ultrasonic endoscopy. In terms of sensitivity, gastroesophageal reflux disease has the highest accuracy rate, reaching 97%, while the invasion depth of colon neoplasia has the lowest accuracy rate, only 71%. On the other hand, the specificity of colorectal cancer is the highest, reaching 98%, while the gastrointestinal stromal tumor has the lowest, only 80%. The GRADE evaluation suggests that the reliability of most outcomes are evaluated as low or very low. Conclusions: AI shows the value of diagnosis in endoscopy, especially in esophageal and colorectal diseases. These findings provide a theoretical basis for the development and evaluation of the use of AI-assisted systems, which are aimed at assisting endoscopists to carry out examinations to improve human health. However, it is worth noting further high-quality research is needed in the future.","PeriodicalId":56334,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Medical Informatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Medical Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/56361","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Some research has already reported the diagnostic value of artificial intelligence (AI) in different endoscopy outcomes. However, the evidence is confusing and of varying quality. Objective: To comprehensively evaluate the credibility of the evidence of the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence in endoscopy. Methods: Before the study began, the protocol was registered in the International prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42023483073). Firstly, two researchers searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library using comprehensive search terms. The deadline is November 2023. Then, researchers conduct screening research and extract information. We use A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR2) to evaluate the quality of the article. We choose the research with higher quality evaluation for the same outcome for further analysis. In order to ensure the reliability of the conclusion, we have calculated each outcome again. Finally, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) is used to evaluate the credibility of the outcome. Results: A total of 21 studies were included for analysis. Through AMSTAR2, it was found that eight research methodologies were of moderate quality, while other studies were regarded as low or critical low. The sensitivity and specificity of 17 different outcomes were analyzed. There are four different outcomes related to the esophagus, stomach, and colorectal, respectively. Two outcomes are associated with capsule endoscopy and laryngoscope, respectively. While the other is related to ultrasonic endoscopy. In terms of sensitivity, gastroesophageal reflux disease has the highest accuracy rate, reaching 97%, while the invasion depth of colon neoplasia has the lowest accuracy rate, only 71%. On the other hand, the specificity of colorectal cancer is the highest, reaching 98%, while the gastrointestinal stromal tumor has the lowest, only 80%. The GRADE evaluation suggests that the reliability of most outcomes are evaluated as low or very low. Conclusions: AI shows the value of diagnosis in endoscopy, especially in esophageal and colorectal diseases. These findings provide a theoretical basis for the development and evaluation of the use of AI-assisted systems, which are aimed at assisting endoscopists to carry out examinations to improve human health. However, it is worth noting further high-quality research is needed in the future.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人工智能在内窥镜检查中的诊断准确性:综述
背景:一些研究已经报告了人工智能(AI)在不同内窥镜检查结果中的诊断价值。然而,这些证据混乱且质量参差不齐。目的全面评估人工智能在内窥镜检查中诊断准确性证据的可信度。研究方法研究开始前,研究方案已在国际前瞻性系统综述注册中心(CRD42023483073)注册。首先,两名研究人员使用综合检索词检索了 PubMed、Web of Science、Embase 和 Cochrane Library。截止日期为 2023 年 11 月。然后,研究人员进行筛选研究并提取信息。我们使用 "评估系统性综述的测量工具 2"(AMSTAR2)来评价文章的质量。我们会选择对相同结果评价质量较高的研究进行进一步分析。为了确保结论的可靠性,我们对每项结果都进行了重新计算。最后,我们采用建议评估、发展和评价分级法(GRADE)来评价结果的可信度。结果:共纳入 21 项研究进行分析。通过 AMSTAR2,发现有 8 项研究方法的质量为中等,其他研究则被视为低质量或临界低质量。分析了 17 种不同结果的敏感性和特异性。有四种不同的结果分别与食道、胃和结肠直肠有关。两种结果分别与胶囊内窥镜和喉镜有关。另一种则与超声波内窥镜检查有关。在灵敏度方面,胃食管反流病的准确率最高,达到 97%,而结肠肿瘤侵犯深度的准确率最低,仅为 71%。另一方面,结直肠癌的特异性最高,达到 98%,而胃肠道间质瘤的特异性最低,仅为 80%。GRADE 评估表明,大多数结果的可靠性被评为较低或非常低。结论人工智能显示了内窥镜诊断的价值,尤其是在食道和结直肠疾病方面。这些发现为开发和评估人工智能辅助系统的使用提供了理论依据,这些系统旨在协助内镜医师进行检查,以改善人类健康。不过,值得注意的是,今后还需要进一步开展高质量的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
JMIR Medical Informatics
JMIR Medical Informatics Medicine-Health Informatics
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
3.10%
发文量
173
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: JMIR Medical Informatics (JMI, ISSN 2291-9694) is a top-rated, tier A journal which focuses on clinical informatics, big data in health and health care, decision support for health professionals, electronic health records, ehealth infrastructures and implementation. It has a focus on applied, translational research, with a broad readership including clinicians, CIOs, engineers, industry and health informatics professionals. Published by JMIR Publications, publisher of the Journal of Medical Internet Research (JMIR), the leading eHealth/mHealth journal (Impact Factor 2016: 5.175), JMIR Med Inform has a slightly different scope (emphasizing more on applications for clinicians and health professionals rather than consumers/citizens, which is the focus of JMIR), publishes even faster, and also allows papers which are more technical or more formative than what would be published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research.
期刊最新文献
Comparative Study to Evaluate the Accuracy of Differential Diagnosis Lists Generated by Gemini Advanced, Gemini, and Bard for a Case Report Series Analysis: Cross-Sectional Study. Disambiguating Clinical Abbreviations by One-to-All Classification: Algorithm Development and Validation Study. Addressing Information Biases Within Electronic Health Record Data to Improve the Examination of Epidemiologic Associations With Diabetes Prevalence Among Young Adults: Cross-Sectional Study. Toward Better Semantic Interoperability of Data Element Repositories in Medicine: Analysis Study. Practical Aspects of Using Large Language Models to Screen Abstracts for Cardiovascular Drug Development: Cross-Sectional Study.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1