评估腕骨年龄的两种不同人工智能(AI)方法与标准 Greulich 和 Pyle 方法的性能比较。

IF 9.7 1区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Radiologia Medica Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-20 DOI:10.1007/s11547-024-01871-2
Davide Alaimo, Maria Chiara Terranova, Ettore Palizzolo, Manfredi De Angelis, Vittorio Avella, Giuseppe Paviglianiti, Giuseppe Lo Re, Domenica Matranga, Sergio Salerno
{"title":"评估腕骨年龄的两种不同人工智能(AI)方法与标准 Greulich 和 Pyle 方法的性能比较。","authors":"Davide Alaimo, Maria Chiara Terranova, Ettore Palizzolo, Manfredi De Angelis, Vittorio Avella, Giuseppe Paviglianiti, Giuseppe Lo Re, Domenica Matranga, Sergio Salerno","doi":"10.1007/s11547-024-01871-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Evaluate the agreement between bone age assessments conducted by two distinct machine learning system and standard Greulich and Pyle method.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Carpal radiographs of 225 patients (mean age 8 years and 10 months, SD = 3 years and 1 month) were retrospectively analysed at two separate institutions (October 2018 and May 2022) by both expert radiologists and radiologists in training as well as by two distinct AI software programmes, 16-bit AI<sup>tm</sup> and BoneXpert® in a blinded manner.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The bone age range estimated by the 16-bit AI<sup>tm</sup> system in our sample varied between 1 year and 1 month and 15 years and 8 months (mean bone age 9 years and 5 months SD = 3 years and 3 months). BoneXpert® estimated bone age ranged between 8 months and 15 years and 7 months (mean bone age 8 years and 11 months SD = 3 years and 3 months). The average bone age estimated by the Greulich and Pyle method was between 11 months and 14 years, 9 months (mean bone age 8 years and 4 months SD = 3 years and 3 months). Radiologists' assessments using the Greulich and Pyle method were significantly correlated (Pearson's r > 0.80, p < 0.001). There was no statistical difference between BoneXpert® and 16-bit AI<sup>tm</sup> (mean difference = - 0.19, 95%CI = (- 0.45; 0.08)), and the agreement between two measurements varies between - 3.45 (95%CI = (- 3.95; - 3.03) and 3.07 (95%CI - 3.03; 3.57).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both AI methods and GP provide correlated results, although the measurements made by AI were closer to each other compared to the GP method.</p>","PeriodicalId":20817,"journal":{"name":"Radiologia Medica","volume":" ","pages":"1507-1512"},"PeriodicalIF":9.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11480116/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance of two different artificial intelligence (AI) methods for assessing carpal bone age compared to the standard Greulich and Pyle method.\",\"authors\":\"Davide Alaimo, Maria Chiara Terranova, Ettore Palizzolo, Manfredi De Angelis, Vittorio Avella, Giuseppe Paviglianiti, Giuseppe Lo Re, Domenica Matranga, Sergio Salerno\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11547-024-01871-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Evaluate the agreement between bone age assessments conducted by two distinct machine learning system and standard Greulich and Pyle method.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Carpal radiographs of 225 patients (mean age 8 years and 10 months, SD = 3 years and 1 month) were retrospectively analysed at two separate institutions (October 2018 and May 2022) by both expert radiologists and radiologists in training as well as by two distinct AI software programmes, 16-bit AI<sup>tm</sup> and BoneXpert® in a blinded manner.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The bone age range estimated by the 16-bit AI<sup>tm</sup> system in our sample varied between 1 year and 1 month and 15 years and 8 months (mean bone age 9 years and 5 months SD = 3 years and 3 months). BoneXpert® estimated bone age ranged between 8 months and 15 years and 7 months (mean bone age 8 years and 11 months SD = 3 years and 3 months). The average bone age estimated by the Greulich and Pyle method was between 11 months and 14 years, 9 months (mean bone age 8 years and 4 months SD = 3 years and 3 months). Radiologists' assessments using the Greulich and Pyle method were significantly correlated (Pearson's r > 0.80, p < 0.001). There was no statistical difference between BoneXpert® and 16-bit AI<sup>tm</sup> (mean difference = - 0.19, 95%CI = (- 0.45; 0.08)), and the agreement between two measurements varies between - 3.45 (95%CI = (- 3.95; - 3.03) and 3.07 (95%CI - 3.03; 3.57).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both AI methods and GP provide correlated results, although the measurements made by AI were closer to each other compared to the GP method.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20817,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radiologia Medica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1507-1512\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11480116/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radiologia Medica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-024-01871-2\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiologia Medica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-024-01871-2","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评估两种不同的机器学习系统与标准Greulich和Pyle方法进行的骨龄评估之间的一致性:在两家不同的机构(2018 年 10 月和 2022 年 5 月),由放射科专家和正在接受培训的放射科专家对 225 名患者(平均年龄 8 岁 10 个月,SD = 3 岁 1 个月)的腕骨X光片进行了回顾性分析,并由 16 位 AItm 和 BoneXpert® 两款不同的人工智能软件进行了盲法分析:结果:在我们的样本中,16 位 AItm 系统估计的骨龄范围在 1 岁 1 个月到 15 岁 8 个月之间(平均骨龄为 9 岁 5 个月 SD = 3 岁 3 个月)。BoneXpert® 估计的骨龄介于 8 个月到 15 岁零 7 个月之间(平均骨龄为 8 岁零 11 个月 SD = 3 岁零 3 个月)。用 Greulich 和 Pyle 方法估计的平均骨龄为 11 个月至 14 岁零 9 个月(平均骨龄为 8 岁零 4 个月 SD = 3 岁零 3 个月)。放射科医生使用 Greulich 和 Pyle 方法进行的评估具有显著相关性(Pearson's r > 0.80,p tm(平均差异 = - 0.19,95%CI = (- 0.45; 0.08)),两次测量的一致性介于 - 3.45 (95%CI = (- 3.95; - 3.03) 和 3.07 (95%CI - 3.03; 3.57) 之间:AI方法和GP方法都能提供相关的结果,但与GP方法相比,AI方法的测量结果更为接近。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Performance of two different artificial intelligence (AI) methods for assessing carpal bone age compared to the standard Greulich and Pyle method.

Purpose: Evaluate the agreement between bone age assessments conducted by two distinct machine learning system and standard Greulich and Pyle method.

Materials and methods: Carpal radiographs of 225 patients (mean age 8 years and 10 months, SD = 3 years and 1 month) were retrospectively analysed at two separate institutions (October 2018 and May 2022) by both expert radiologists and radiologists in training as well as by two distinct AI software programmes, 16-bit AItm and BoneXpert® in a blinded manner.

Results: The bone age range estimated by the 16-bit AItm system in our sample varied between 1 year and 1 month and 15 years and 8 months (mean bone age 9 years and 5 months SD = 3 years and 3 months). BoneXpert® estimated bone age ranged between 8 months and 15 years and 7 months (mean bone age 8 years and 11 months SD = 3 years and 3 months). The average bone age estimated by the Greulich and Pyle method was between 11 months and 14 years, 9 months (mean bone age 8 years and 4 months SD = 3 years and 3 months). Radiologists' assessments using the Greulich and Pyle method were significantly correlated (Pearson's r > 0.80, p < 0.001). There was no statistical difference between BoneXpert® and 16-bit AItm (mean difference = - 0.19, 95%CI = (- 0.45; 0.08)), and the agreement between two measurements varies between - 3.45 (95%CI = (- 3.95; - 3.03) and 3.07 (95%CI - 3.03; 3.57).

Conclusions: Both AI methods and GP provide correlated results, although the measurements made by AI were closer to each other compared to the GP method.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Radiologia Medica
Radiologia Medica 医学-核医学
CiteScore
14.10
自引率
7.90%
发文量
133
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Felice Perussia founded La radiologia medica in 1914. It is a peer-reviewed journal and serves as the official journal of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM). The primary purpose of the journal is to disseminate information related to Radiology, especially advancements in diagnostic imaging and related disciplines. La radiologia medica welcomes original research on both fundamental and clinical aspects of modern radiology, with a particular focus on diagnostic and interventional imaging techniques. It also covers topics such as radiotherapy, nuclear medicine, radiobiology, health physics, and artificial intelligence in the context of clinical implications. The journal includes various types of contributions such as original articles, review articles, editorials, short reports, and letters to the editor. With an esteemed Editorial Board and a selection of insightful reports, the journal is an indispensable resource for radiologists and professionals in related fields. Ultimately, La radiologia medica aims to serve as a platform for international collaboration and knowledge sharing within the radiological community.
期刊最新文献
Weight censorial score: estimation of the weight loss during concurrent chemo-radiotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients by image features predicts prognosis. 18F-FDG PET/CT radiomic analysis and artificial intelligence to predict pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients. Automated spinopelvic measurements on radiographs with artificial intelligence: a multi-reader study. Superior performance in classification of breast cancer molecular subtype and histological factors by radiomics based on ultrafast MRI over standard MRI: evidence from a prospective study. The posterior cruciate ligament angle in the setting of anterior cruciate ligament deficient knees: the effect of gender, age, time from injury and tibial slope.
×
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