Impact of e-ASPECTS software on the performance of physicians compared to a consensus ground truth: a multi-reader, multi-case study

Kobeissi, H; Kallmes, DF; Benson, J; Nagelschneider, A; Madhavan, A; Messina, SA; Schwartz, K; Campeau, N; Carr, CM; Nasr, DM; Braksick, S; Scharf, EL; Klaas, J; Woodhead, ZVJ; Harston, G; Briggs, J; Joly, O; Gerry, S; Kuhn, AL; Kostas, AA; Nael, K; AbdalKader, M; Kadirvel, R; Brinjikji, W

AI Collection

Journal article

Impact of e-ASPECTS software on the performance of physicians compared to a consensus ground truth: a multi-reader, multi-case study

Abstract:: BackgroundThe Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) is used to quantify the extent of injury to the brain following acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and to inform treatment decisions. The e-ASPECTS software uses artificial intelligence methods to automatically process non-contrast CT (NCCT) brain scans from patients with AIS affecting the middle cerebral artery (MCA) territory and generate an ASPECTS. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of e-ASPECTS (Brainomix, Oxford, UK) on the performance of US physicians compared to a consensus ground truth.MethodsThe study used a multi-reader, multi-case design. A total of 10 US board-certified physicians (neurologists and neuroradiologists) scored 54 NCCT brain scans of patients with AIS affecting the MCA territory. Each reader scored each scan on two occasions: once with and once without reference to the e-ASPECTS software, in random order. Agreement with a reference standard (expert consensus read with reference to follow-up imaging) was evaluated with and without software support.ResultsA comparison of the area under the curve (AUC) for each reader showed a significant improvement from 0.81 to 0.83 (p = 0.028) with the support of the e-ASPECTS tool. The agreement of reader ASPECTS scoring with the reference standard was improved with e-ASPECTS compared to unassisted reading of scans: Cohen's kappa improved from 0.60 to 0.65, and the case-based weighted Kappa improved from 0.70 to 0.81.ConclusionDecision support with the e-ASPECTS software significantly improves the accuracy of ASPECTS scoring, even by expert US neurologists and neuroradiologists

Publication status:: Published

Peer review status:: Peer reviewed

Actions

Email

Email this record

Send the bibliographic details of this record to your email address.

Your Email
Please enter the email address that the record information will be sent to.

-
Your message (optional)
Please add any additional information to be included within the email.
Share
Cite

Cite this record

APA Style

Kobeissi, H., Kallmes, D. F., Benson, J., Nagelschneider, A., Madhavan, A., Messina, S. A., Schwartz, K., Campeau, N., Carr, C. M., Nasr, D. M., Braksick, S., Scharf, E. L., Klaas, J., Woodhead, Z. V. J., Harston, G., Briggs, J., Joly, O., Gerry, S., Kuhn, A. L., … Brinjikji, W. (2023). Impact of e-ASPECTS software on the performance of physicians compared to a consensus ground truth: a multi-reader, multi-case study. Frontiers in Neurology, 14, 1221255–1221255.

MLA Style

Kobeissi, H, et al. “Impact of e-ASPECTS Software on the Performance of Physicians Compared to a Consensus Ground Truth: a Multi-Reader, Multi-Case Study.” Frontiers in Neurology, vol. 14, 2023, pp. 1221255–55.

Chicago Style

Kobeissi, H, DF Kallmes, J Benson, et al. 2023. “Impact of e-ASPECTS Software on the Performance of Physicians Compared to a Consensus Ground Truth: a Multi-Reader, Multi-Case Study.” Frontiers in Neurology 14: 1221255–55.
Print