117
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0
shares
    • Review: found
    Is Open Access

    Review of 'Are current machine learning applications comparable to radiologist classification of degenerate and herniated discs and Modic change? A systematic review and meta-analysis'

    Bookmark
    5
    Are current machine learning applications comparable to radiologist classification of degenerate and herniated discs and Modic change? A systematic review and meta-analysisCrossref
    Average rating:
        Rated 5 of 5.
    Level of importance:
        Rated 5 of 5.
    Level of validity:
        Rated 4 of 5.
    Level of completeness:
        Rated 5 of 5.
    Level of comprehensibility:
        Rated 5 of 5.
    Competing interests:
    None

    Reviewed article

    • Record: found
    • Abstract: found
    • Article: found
    Is Open Access

    Are current machine learning applications comparable to radiologist classification of degenerate and herniated discs and Modic change? A systematic review and meta-analysis

    Introduction Low back pain is the leading contributor to disability burden globally. It is commonly due to degeneration of the lumbar intervertebral discs (LDD). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the current best tool to visualize and diagnose LDD, but places high time demands on clinical radiologists. Automated reading of spine MRIs could improve speed, accuracy, reliability and cost effectiveness in radiology departments. The aim of this review and meta-analysis was to determine if current machine learning algorithms perform well identifying disc degeneration, herniation, bulge and Modic change compared to radiologists. Methods A PRISMA systematic review protocol was developed and four electronic databases and reference lists were searched. Strict inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined. A PROBAST risk of bias and applicability analysis was performed. Results 1350 articles were extracted. Duplicates were removed and title and abstract searching identified original research articles that used machine learning (ML) algorithms to identify disc degeneration, herniation, bulge and Modic change from MRIs. 27 studies were included in the review; 25 and 14 studies were included multi-variate and bivariate meta-analysis, respectively. Studies used machine learning algorithms to assess LDD, disc herniation, bulge and Modic change. Models using deep learning, support vector machine, k-nearest neighbors, random forest and naïve Bayes algorithms were included. Meta-analyses found no differences in algorithm or classification performance. When algorithms were tested in replication or external validation studies, they did not perform as well as when assessed in developmental studies. Data augmentation improved algorithm performance when compared to models used with smaller datasets, there were no performance differences between augmented data and large datasets. Discussion This review highlights several shortcomings of current approaches, including few validation attempts or use of large sample sizes. To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first systematic review to explore this topic. We suggest the utilization of deep learning coupled with semi- or unsupervised learning approaches. Use of all information contained in MRI data will improve accuracy. Clear and complete reporting of study design, statistics and results will improve the reliability and quality of published literature. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00586-023-07718-0.
      Bookmark

      Review information


      Orthopedics

      Review text

      This paper extensively investigates the capabilities of machine learning applications in the identification and classification of spinal disorders, and then contextualizes those capabilities in comparison to human radiologists. The article aims to determine the efficacy of these algorithms in identifying disc degeneration, herniation, bulge, and Modic changes. It addresses a crucial set of issues—improving the speed, accuracy, reliability, and cost-effectiveness in radiology departments, especially those with orthopaedic and neurosurgical specialization, which are commonly comprised of clinicians who are particularly burdened with high demands for reading spine MRIs. Using the standard PRISMA systematic review protocol, the authors ensured the rigor and transparency of the literature that was appraised as part of their review process. A substantial number of studies were reviewed (1350 articles initially, with 27 included in the review), providing a broad perspective. Additionally, a variety of statistical algorithms were explored, including deep learning, support vector machine, k-nearest neighbors, random forest, and naïve Bayes algorithms. The meta-analysis did not find significant differences in machine learning-based classification performance compared to radiologists. Of note, the algorithms did not perform as well in replication or external validation studies as they did in developmental studies. This suggests some that there might be a component of "overfitting" that has resulted in overconfidence in the predictive capabilities of these models. Such findings highlight the idea that although machine learning algorithms are superior to humans at performing some set of narrow or specific computational problems, they are associated with methodological weaknesses that might not emerge immediately or as conspicuously as weaknesses known to be associated with traditional statistical analysis techniques. Looking ahead, the paper suggests that the utilization of deep learning in conjunction with either semi- or unsupervised learning approaches might help in overcoming some of the identified challenges.

       

      Comments

      Comment on this review

      Version and Review History