Ross Filice

Adrit Rao, Malte Jensen, Andrea T. Fisher et al.

Artificial intelligence allows automatic extraction of imaging biomarkers from already-acquired radiologic images. This paradigm of opportunistic imaging adds value to medical imaging without additional imaging costs or patient radiation exposure. However, many open-source image analysis solutions lack rigorous validation while commercial solutions lack transparency, leading to unexpected failures when deployed. Here, we report development and validation for two of the first fully open-sourced, FDA-510(k)-cleared deep learning pipelines to mitigate both challenges: Abdominal Aortic Quantification (AAQ) and Bone Mineral Density (BMD) estimation are both offered within the Comp2Comp package for opportunistic analysis of computed tomography scans. AAQ segments the abdominal aorta to assess aneurysm size; BMD segments vertebral bodies to estimate trabecular bone density and osteoporosis risk. AAQ-derived maximal aortic diameters were compared against radiologist ground-truth measurements on 258 patient scans enriched for abdominal aortic aneurysms from four external institutions. BMD binary classifications (low vs. normal bone density) were compared against concurrent DXA scan ground truths obtained on 371 patient scans from four external institutions. AAQ had an overall mean absolute error of 1.57 mm (95% CI 1.38-1.80 mm). BMD had a sensitivity of 81.0% (95% CI 74.0-86.8%) and specificity of 78.4% (95% CI 72.3-83.7%). Comp2Comp AAQ and BMD demonstrated sufficient accuracy for clinical use. Open-sourcing these algorithms improves transparency of typically opaque FDA clearance processes, allows hospitals to test the algorithms before cumbersome clinical pilots, and provides researchers with best-in-class methods.

Sean MacAvaney, Arman Cohan, Nazli Goharian et al.

Medical errors are a major public health concern and a leading cause of death worldwide. Many healthcare centers and hospitals use reporting systems where medical practitioners write a preliminary medical report and the report is later reviewed, revised, and finalized by a more experienced physician. The revisions range from stylistic to corrections of critical errors or misinterpretations of the case. Due to the large quantity of reports written daily, it is often difficult to manually and thoroughly review all the finalized reports to find such errors and learn from them. To address this challenge, we propose a novel ranking approach, consisting of textual and ontological overlaps between the preliminary and final versions of reports. The approach learns to rank the reports based on the degree of discrepancy between the versions. This allows medical practitioners to easily identify and learn from the reports in which their interpretation most substantially differed from that of the attending physician (who finalized the report). This is a crucial step towards uncovering potential errors and helping medical practitioners to learn from such errors, thus improving patient-care in the long run. We evaluate our model on a dataset of radiology reports and show that our approach outperforms both previously-proposed approaches and more recent language models by 4.5% to 15.4%.