RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      검색결과 좁혀 보기

      선택해제

      오늘 본 자료

      • 오늘 본 자료가 없습니다.
      더보기
      • 무료
      • 기관 내 무료
      • 유료
      • KCI등재

        Clinical Validation of a Deep Learning-Based Hybrid (Greulich-Pyle and Modified Tanner-Whitehouse) Method for Bone Age Assessment

        Lee Kyu-Chong,Lee Kee-Hyoung,Kang Chang Ho,Ahn Kyung-Sik,Chung Lindsey Yoojin,Lee Jae-Joon,Hong Suk Joo,Kim Baek Hyun,Shim Euddeum 대한영상의학회 2021 Korean Journal of Radiology Vol.22 No.12

        Objective: To evaluate the accuracy and clinical efficacy of a hybrid Greulich-Pyle (GP) and modified Tanner-Whitehouse (TW) artificial intelligence (AI) model for bone age assessment. Materials and Methods: A deep learning-based model was trained on an open dataset of multiple ethnicities. A total of 102 hand radiographs (51 male and 51 female; mean age ± standard deviation = 10.95 ± 2.37 years) from a single institution were selected for external validation. Three human experts performed bone age assessments based on the GP atlas to develop a reference standard. Two study radiologists performed bone age assessments with and without AI model assistance in two separate sessions, for which the reading time was recorded. The performance of the AI software was assessed by comparing the mean absolute difference between the AI-calculated bone age and the reference standard. The reading time was compared between reading with and without AI using a paired t test. Furthermore, the reliability between the two study radiologists’ bone age assessments was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and the results were compared between reading with and without AI. Results: The bone ages assessed by the experts and the AI model were not significantly different (11.39 ± 2.74 years and 11.35 ± 2.76 years, respectively, p = 0.31). The mean absolute difference was 0.39 years (95% confidence interval, 0.33– 0.45 years) between the automated AI assessment and the reference standard. The mean reading time of the two study radiologists was reduced from 54.29 to 35.37 seconds with AI model assistance (p < 0.001). The ICC of the two study radiologists slightly increased with AI model assistance (from 0.945 to 0.990). Conclusion: The proposed AI model was accurate for assessing bone age. Furthermore, this model appeared to enhance the clinical efficacy by reducing the reading time and improving the inter-observer reliability

      연관 검색어 추천

      이 검색어로 많이 본 자료

      활용도 높은 자료

      해외이동버튼