Performance and Agreement When Annotating Chest X-ray Text Reports—A Preliminary Step in the Development of a Deep Learning-Based Prioritization and Detection System

Author:

Li Dana12,Pehrson Lea Marie13,Bonnevie Rasmus4,Fraccaro Marco4,Thrane Jakob4,Tøttrup Lea4,Lauridsen Carsten Ammitzbøl15,Butt Balaganeshan Sedrah6ORCID,Jankovic Jelena1,Andersen Tobias Thostrup1,Mayar Alyas7,Hansen Kristoffer Lindskov12,Carlsen Jonathan Frederik12ORCID,Darkner Sune3,Nielsen Michael Bachmann12ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark

2. Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark

3. Department of Computer Science, University of Copenhagen, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark

4. Unumed Aps, 1055 Copenhagen, Denmark

5. Radiography Education, University College Copenhagen, 2200 Copenhagen, Denmark

6. Novo Nordisk Foundation Center for Protein Research, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark

7. Department of Health Sciences, Panum Institute, University of Copenhagen, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark

Abstract

A chest X-ray report is a communicative tool and can be used as data for developing artificial intelligence-based decision support systems. For both, consistent understanding and labeling is important. Our aim was to investigate how readers would comprehend and annotate 200 chest X-ray reports. Reports written between 1 January 2015 and 11 March 2022 were selected based on search words. Annotators included three board-certified radiologists, two trained radiologists (physicians), two radiographers (radiological technicians), a non-radiological physician, and a medical student. Consensus labels by two or more of the experienced radiologists were considered “gold standard”. Matthew’s correlation coefficient (MCC) was calculated to assess annotation performance, and descriptive statistics were used to assess agreement between individual annotators and labels. The intermediate radiologist had the best correlation to “gold standard” (MCC 0.77). This was followed by the novice radiologist and medical student (MCC 0.71 for both), the novice radiographer (MCC 0.65), non-radiological physician (MCC 0.64), and experienced radiographer (MCC 0.57). Our findings showed that for developing an artificial intelligence-based support system, if trained radiologists are not available, annotations from non-radiological annotators with basic and general knowledge may be more aligned with radiologists compared to annotations from sub-specialized medical staff, if their sub-specialization is outside of diagnostic radiology.

Funder

Innovation Fund Denmark

Publisher

MDPI AG

Subject

Clinical Biochemistry

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3