Nathan T. Riek PhD(c) , Tanmay A. Gokhale MD, PhD , Christian Martin-Gill MD, MPH , Karina Kraevsky-Philips PhD(c), RN , Jessica K. Zègre-Hemsey RN, PhD , Samir Saba MD , Clifton W. Callaway MD, PhD , Murat Akcakaya PhD , Salah S. Al-Zaiti PhD
{"title":"从院前 12 导联心电图识别闭塞性心肌梗死的基于深度学习的显著性地图的临床可用性","authors":"Nathan T. Riek PhD(c) , Tanmay A. Gokhale MD, PhD , Christian Martin-Gill MD, MPH , Karina Kraevsky-Philips PhD(c), RN , Jessica K. Zègre-Hemsey RN, PhD , Samir Saba MD , Clifton W. Callaway MD, PhD , Murat Akcakaya PhD , Salah S. Al-Zaiti PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2024.153792","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Deep learning (DL) models offer improved performance in electrocardiogram (ECG)-based classification over rule-based methods. However, for widespread adoption by clinicians, explainability methods, like saliency maps, are essential.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>On a subset of 100 ECGs from patients with chest pain, we generated saliency maps using a previously validated convolutional neural network for occlusion myocardial infarction (OMI) classification. Three clinicians reviewed ECG-saliency map dyads, first assessing the likelihood of OMI from standard ECGs and then evaluating clinical relevance and helpfulness of the saliency maps, as well as their confidence in the model's predictions. Questions were answered on a Likert scale ranging from +3 (most useful/relevant) to −3 (least useful/relevant).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The adjudicated accuracy of the three clinicians matched the DL model when considering area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) and F1 score (AUC 0.855 vs. 0.872, F1 score = 0.789 vs. 0.747). On average, clinicians found saliency maps slightly clinically relevant (0.96 ± 0.92) and slightly helpful (0.66 ± 0.98) in identifying or ruling out OMI but had higher confidence in the model's predictions (1.71 ± 0.56). Clinicians noted that leads I and aVL were often emphasized, even when obvious ST changes were present in other leads.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In this clinical usability study, clinicians deemed saliency maps somewhat helpful in enhancing explainability of DL-based ECG models. The spatial convolutional layers across the 12 leads in these models appear to contribute to the discrepancy between ECG segments considered most relevant by clinicians and segments that drove DL model predictions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15606,"journal":{"name":"Journal of electrocardiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022073624002620/pdfft?md5=35679429fcb9a91950afb59c5b50379d&pid=1-s2.0-S0022073624002620-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical usability of deep learning-based saliency maps for occlusion myocardial infarction identification from the prehospital 12-Lead electrocardiogram\",\"authors\":\"Nathan T. Riek PhD(c) , Tanmay A. Gokhale MD, PhD , Christian Martin-Gill MD, MPH , Karina Kraevsky-Philips PhD(c), RN , Jessica K. Zègre-Hemsey RN, PhD , Samir Saba MD , Clifton W. Callaway MD, PhD , Murat Akcakaya PhD , Salah S. Al-Zaiti PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2024.153792\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Deep learning (DL) models offer improved performance in electrocardiogram (ECG)-based classification over rule-based methods. However, for widespread adoption by clinicians, explainability methods, like saliency maps, are essential.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>On a subset of 100 ECGs from patients with chest pain, we generated saliency maps using a previously validated convolutional neural network for occlusion myocardial infarction (OMI) classification. Three clinicians reviewed ECG-saliency map dyads, first assessing the likelihood of OMI from standard ECGs and then evaluating clinical relevance and helpfulness of the saliency maps, as well as their confidence in the model's predictions. Questions were answered on a Likert scale ranging from +3 (most useful/relevant) to −3 (least useful/relevant).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The adjudicated accuracy of the three clinicians matched the DL model when considering area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) and F1 score (AUC 0.855 vs. 0.872, F1 score = 0.789 vs. 0.747). On average, clinicians found saliency maps slightly clinically relevant (0.96 ± 0.92) and slightly helpful (0.66 ± 0.98) in identifying or ruling out OMI but had higher confidence in the model's predictions (1.71 ± 0.56). Clinicians noted that leads I and aVL were often emphasized, even when obvious ST changes were present in other leads.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In this clinical usability study, clinicians deemed saliency maps somewhat helpful in enhancing explainability of DL-based ECG models. The spatial convolutional layers across the 12 leads in these models appear to contribute to the discrepancy between ECG segments considered most relevant by clinicians and segments that drove DL model predictions.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15606,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of electrocardiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022073624002620/pdfft?md5=35679429fcb9a91950afb59c5b50379d&pid=1-s2.0-S0022073624002620-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of electrocardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022073624002620\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of electrocardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022073624002620","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
导言与基于规则的方法相比,深度学习(DL)模型在基于心电图(ECG)的分类中具有更高的性能。方法 在胸痛患者的 100 张心电图子集中,我们使用先前验证过的卷积神经网络生成了显著性图,用于闭塞性心肌梗塞(OMI)分类。三位临床医生审查了心电图-显著性图对,首先根据标准心电图评估了 OMI 的可能性,然后评估了显著性图的临床相关性和有用性,以及他们对模型预测的信心。结果当考虑到接收者操作特征曲线下面积(AUC)和 F1 分数(AUC 0.855 vs. 0.872,F1 分数 = 0.789 vs. 0.747)时,三位临床医生判定的准确性与 DL 模型相匹配。平均而言,临床医生认为突出图与临床略有相关(0.96 ± 0.92),对识别或排除 OMI 略有帮助(0.66 ± 0.98),但对模型预测的置信度较高(1.71 ± 0.56)。结论在这项临床可用性研究中,临床医生认为突出图在一定程度上有助于提高基于 DL 的心电图模型的可解释性。这些模型中跨越 12 个导联的空间卷积层似乎是造成临床医生认为最相关的心电图节段与驱动 DL 模型预测的节段之间存在差异的原因。
Clinical usability of deep learning-based saliency maps for occlusion myocardial infarction identification from the prehospital 12-Lead electrocardiogram
Introduction
Deep learning (DL) models offer improved performance in electrocardiogram (ECG)-based classification over rule-based methods. However, for widespread adoption by clinicians, explainability methods, like saliency maps, are essential.
Methods
On a subset of 100 ECGs from patients with chest pain, we generated saliency maps using a previously validated convolutional neural network for occlusion myocardial infarction (OMI) classification. Three clinicians reviewed ECG-saliency map dyads, first assessing the likelihood of OMI from standard ECGs and then evaluating clinical relevance and helpfulness of the saliency maps, as well as their confidence in the model's predictions. Questions were answered on a Likert scale ranging from +3 (most useful/relevant) to −3 (least useful/relevant).
Results
The adjudicated accuracy of the three clinicians matched the DL model when considering area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) and F1 score (AUC 0.855 vs. 0.872, F1 score = 0.789 vs. 0.747). On average, clinicians found saliency maps slightly clinically relevant (0.96 ± 0.92) and slightly helpful (0.66 ± 0.98) in identifying or ruling out OMI but had higher confidence in the model's predictions (1.71 ± 0.56). Clinicians noted that leads I and aVL were often emphasized, even when obvious ST changes were present in other leads.
Conclusion
In this clinical usability study, clinicians deemed saliency maps somewhat helpful in enhancing explainability of DL-based ECG models. The spatial convolutional layers across the 12 leads in these models appear to contribute to the discrepancy between ECG segments considered most relevant by clinicians and segments that drove DL model predictions.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Electrocardiology is devoted exclusively to clinical and experimental studies of the electrical activities of the heart. It seeks to contribute significantly to the accuracy of diagnosis and prognosis and the effective treatment, prevention, or delay of heart disease. Editorial contents include electrocardiography, vectorcardiography, arrhythmias, membrane action potential, cardiac pacing, monitoring defibrillation, instrumentation, drug effects, and computer applications.