■我们研究了人类与计算机辅助检测(CADe)系统之间的交互如何受到用户体验和息肉特征的影响。
■我们使用YOLOv4开发了CADe系统,对来自1,914名患者的16,996张息肉图像和1,800张合成的无柄锯齿状病变(SSL)图像进行了训练。使用计算机化测试模块评估在CADe辅助下的息肉检测性能。18名参与者按结肠镜检查经验分组(护士,研究员,和专家)。根据息肉的组织病理学和检测难度分析CADe的附加值。
■CADe的曲线下面积为0.87(95%置信区间[CI],0.83至0.91)。CADe辅助将整体息肉检测准确率从69.7%提高到77.7%(比值比[OR],1.88;95%CI,1.69至2.09)。然而,当CADe不准确地检测到息肉(OR,0.72;95%CI,0.58至0.87)。CADe援助的影响在护士中最为突出和最不突出(OR,1.97;95%CI,1.71至2.27)和专家(OR,1.42;95%CI,1.15至1.74),分别。参与者在CADe援助下表现出更好的敏感性,腺瘤达到81.7%,易于检测的息肉达到92.4%,超过独立CADe性能的79.7%和89.8%,分别。对于SSLs和难以检测的息肉,参与者对CADe援助的敏感性(66.5%和71.5%,分别)低于独立CADe(81.1%和74.4%)。与其他两组(56.1%和61.7%)相比,专家组在检测SSLs方面显示出最接近独立CADe的灵敏度(79.7%vs81.1%,分别)。
■CADe辅助显着提高了息肉的检测,但它的有效性取决于用户的体验,特别是对于具有挑战性的病变。
UNASSIGNED: We investigated how interactions between humans and computer-aided detection (CADe) systems are influenced by the user\'s experience and polyp characteristics.
UNASSIGNED: We developed a CADe system using YOLOv4, trained on 16,996 polyp images from 1,914 patients and 1,800 synthesized sessile serrated lesion (SSL) images. The performance of polyp detection with CADe assistance was evaluated using a computerized test module. Eighteen participants were grouped by colonoscopy experience (nurses, fellows, and experts). The value added by CADe based on the histopathology and detection difficulty of
polyps were analyzed.
UNASSIGNED: The area under the curve for CADe was 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 0.91). CADe assistance increased overall polyp detection accuracy from 69.7% to 77.7% (odds ratio [OR], 1.88; 95% CI, 1.69 to 2.09). However, accuracy decreased when CADe inaccurately detected a polyp (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.87). The impact of CADe assistance was most and least prominent in the nurses (OR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.71 to 2.27) and the experts (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.74), respectively. Participants demonstrated better sensitivity with CADe assistance, achieving 81.7% for adenomas and 92.4% for easy-to-detect
polyps, surpassing the standalone CADe performance of 79.7% and 89.8%, respectively. For SSLs and difficult-to-detect
polyps, participants\' sensitivities with CADe assistance (66.5% and 71.5%, respectively) were below those of standalone CADe (81.1% and 74.4%). Compared to the other two groups (56.1% and 61.7%), the expert group showed sensitivity closest to that of standalone CADe in detecting SSLs (79.7% vs 81.1%, respectively).
UNASSIGNED: CADe assistance boosts polyp detection significantly, but its effectiveness depends on the user\'s experience, particularly for challenging lesions.