Back

Using Convolutional Neural Networks for the Classification of Suboptimal Chest Radiographs

Liu, E. H.; Carrion, D.; Badawy, M.

2024-11-11 radiology and imaging
10.1101/2024.11.10.24317051 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundChest X-rays (CXR) rank among the most conducted X-ray examinations. They often require repeat imaging due to inadequate quality, leading to increased radiation exposure and delays in patient care and diagnosis. This research assesses the efficacy of DenseNet121 and YOLOv8 neural networks in detecting suboptimal CXRs, which may minimise delays and enhance patient outcomes. MethodThe study included 3,587 patients with a median age of 67 (0-102). It utilised an initial dataset comprising 10,000 CXRs randomly divided into a training subset (4,000 optimal and 4,000 suboptimal) and a validation subset (400 optimal and 400 suboptimal). The test subset (25 optimal and 25 suboptimal) was curated from the remaining images to provide adequate variation. DenseNet121 and YOLOv8 were chosen due to their capabilities in image classification. Their performance was assessed via the area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) and compared to radiologist classification, utilising the chi-squared test. ResultsDenseNet121 attained an AUROC of 0.97, while YOLOv8 recorded a score of 0.95, indicating a strong capability in differentiating between optimal and suboptimal CXRs. The alignment between radiologists and models exhibited variability partly due to the lack of clinical indications. However, the performance was not statistically significant. ConclusionBoth AI models effectively classified chest X-ray quality, demonstrating the potential for providing radiographers with feedback to improve image quality. Notably, this was the first study to include both PA and lateral CXRs, as well as pediatric cases, and the first to evaluate YOLOv8 for this application.

Published in Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences · not in our set (fewer than 10 published preprints to learn from) · training set

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.