Fakultät Informatik und Mathematik
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- conference proceeding (article) (437)
- Article (396)
- conference proceeding (presentation, abstract) (92)
- Part of a Book (88)
- conference proceeding (volume) (23)
- Preprint (22)
- Book (21)
- Report (16)
- Working Paper (11)
- conference talk (8)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (1137)
Keywords
- Bildgebendes Verfahren (22)
- Deep Learning (20)
- Produktionsplanung (18)
- Betriebliches Informationssystem (16)
- Künstliche Intelligenz (16)
- Artificial Intelligence (14)
- Diagnose (14)
- Gebärmutterhalskrebs (14)
- Informationstechnik (14)
- Maschinelles Lernen (14)
Institute
- Fakultät Informatik und Mathematik (1137)
- Labor für Technikfolgenabschätzung und Angewandte Ethik (LaTe) (184)
- Regensburg Medical Image Computing (ReMIC) (164)
- Institut für Sozialforschung und Technikfolgenabschätzung (IST) (145)
- Fakultät Angewandte Sozial- und Gesundheitswissenschaften (97)
- Labor Empirische Sozialforschung (93)
- Regensburg Strategic IT Management (ReSITM) (89)
- Labor für Digitalisierung (LFD) (84)
- Labor eHealth (eH) (66)
- Regensburg Center of Health Sciences and Technology - RCHST (57)
Begutachtungsstatus
- peer-reviewed (495)
- begutachtet (5)
Künstliche Intelligenz (KI) stellt eine Schlüsseltechnologie des gesellschaftlichen Wandels im 21. Jahrhundert dar. Mittlerweile werden zahlreiche technologische Anwendungen genutzt, die auf maschinellem Lernen und den damit verbundenen Möglichkeiten der Datensamm¬lung, -nutzung und -verwertung aufbauen. Indem KI große Datenmengen beherrschbar und verborgene Muster und Zusammenhänge sichtbar macht, wird vieles schneller, einfacher und effizienter – sei es im Alltag, in der Arbeit oder in Organisationen. Offen bleibt jedoch nach wie vor die Frage, welche tiefgreifenden und teilweise latenten Folgen für den Menschen als soziales Wesen und das gesellschaftliche Zusammenleben mit dem Einsatz und der Entwick¬lung von KI verbunden sind. Wie wandelt sich das Verhältnis von Mensch und Technik durch KI und wie ist dieser Wandel zu bewerten? Welche Chancen, aber auch Risiken eröffnen sich durch den Einsatz und die Entwicklung von KI für Mensch und Gesellschaft? Welchen Grenzen unterliegt der Wandel und welche Gestaltungsmöglichkeiten bieten sich? Und nicht zuletzt: Was und wer bestimmt die Entwicklungspfade, die KI nimmt – mit welchen Folgen und für wen?
Background
This study evaluated the effect of an artificial intelligence (AI)-based clinical decision support system on the performance and diagnostic confidence of endoscopists in their assessment of Barrett’s esophagus (BE).
Methods
96 standardized endoscopy videos were assessed by 22 endoscopists with varying degrees of BE experience from 12 centers. Assessment was randomized into two video sets: group A (review first without AI and second with AI) and group B (review first with AI and second without AI). Endoscopists were required to evaluate each video for the presence of Barrett’s esophagus-related neoplasia (BERN) and then decide on a spot for a targeted biopsy. After the second assessment, they were allowed to change their clinical decision and confidence level.
Results
AI had a stand-alone sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 92.2%, 68.9%, and 81.3%, respectively. Without AI, BE experts had an overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 83.3%, 58.1%, and 71.5%, respectively. With AI, BE nonexperts showed a significant improvement in sensitivity and specificity when videos were assessed a second time with AI (sensitivity 69.8% [95%CI 65.2%–74.2%] to 78.0% [95%CI 74.0%–82.0%]; specificity 67.3% [95%CI 62.5%–72.2%] to 72.7% [95%CI 68.2%–77.3%]). In addition, the diagnostic confidence of BE nonexperts improved significantly with AI.
Conclusion
BE nonexperts benefitted significantly from additional AI. BE experts and nonexperts remained significantly below the stand-alone performance of AI, suggesting that there may be other factors influencing endoscopists’ decisions to follow or discard AI advice.
Aims
Recent evidence suggests the possibility of intraprocedural phase recognition in surgical operations as well as endoscopic interventions such as peroral endoscopic myotomy and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) by AI-algorithms. The intricate measurement of intraprocedural phase distribution may deepen the understanding of the procedure. Furthermore, real-time quality assessment as well as automation of reporting may become possible. Therefore, we aimed to develop an AI-algorithm for intraprocedural phase recognition during ESD.
Methods
A training dataset of 364385 single images from 9 full-length ESD videos was compiled. Each frame was classified into one procedural phase. Phases included scope manipulation, marking, injection, application of electrical current and bleeding. Allocation of each frame was only possible to one category. This training dataset was used to train a Video Swin transformer to recognize the phases. Temporal information was included via logarithmic frame sampling. Validation was performed using two separate ESD videos with 29801 single frames.
Results
The validation yielded sensitivities of 97.81%, 97.83%, 95.53%, 85.01% and 87.55% for scope manipulation, marking, injection, electric application and bleeding, respectively. Specificities of 77.78%, 90.91%, 95.91%, 93.65% and 84.76% were measured for the same parameters.
Conclusions
The developed algorithm was able to classify full-length ESD videos on a frame-by-frame basis into the predefined classes with high sensitivities and specificities. Future research will aim at the development of quality metrics based on single-operator phase distribution.
Aims
While AI has been successfully implemented in detecting and characterizing colonic polyps, its role in therapeutic endoscopy remains to be elucidated. Especially third space endoscopy procedures like ESD and peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) pose a technical challenge and the risk of operator-dependent complications like intraprocedural bleeding and perforation. Therefore, we aimed at developing an AI-algorithm for intraprocedural real time vessel detection during ESD and POEM.
Methods
A training dataset consisting of 5470 annotated still images from 59 full-length videos (47 ESD, 12 POEM) and 179681 unlabeled images was used to train a DeepLabV3+neural network with the ECMT semi-supervised learning method. Evaluation for vessel detection rate (VDR) and time (VDT) of 19 endoscopists with and without AI-support was performed using a testing dataset of 101 standardized video clips with 200 predefined blood vessels. Endoscopists were stratified into trainees and experts in third space endoscopy.
Results
The AI algorithm had a mean VDR of 93.5% and a median VDT of 0.32 seconds. AI support was associated with a statistically significant increase in VDR from 54.9% to 73.0% and from 59.0% to 74.1% for trainees and experts, respectively. VDT significantly decreased from 7.21 sec to 5.09 sec for trainees and from 6.10 sec to 5.38 sec for experts in the AI-support group. False positive (FP) readings occurred in 4.5% of frames. FP structures were detected significantly shorter than true positives (0.71 sec vs. 5.99 sec).
Conclusions
AI improved VDR and VDT of trainees and experts in third space endoscopy and may reduce performance variability during training. Further research is needed to evaluate the clinical impact of this new technology.
Aims
Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems in gastrointestinal endoscopy are narrow because they are trained to solve only one specific task. Unlike Narrow-AI, general AI systems may be able to solve multiple and unrelated tasks. We aimed to understand whether an AI system trained to detect, characterize, and segment early Barrett’s neoplasia (Barrett’s AI) is only capable of detecting this pathology or can also detect and segment other diseases like early squamous cell cancer (SCC).
Methods
120 white light (WL) and narrow-band endoscopic images (NBI) from 60 patients (1 WL and 1 NBI image per patient) were extracted from the endoscopic database of the University Hospital Augsburg. Images were annotated by three expert endoscopists with extensive experience in the diagnosis and endoscopic resection of early esophageal neoplasias. An AI system based on DeepLabV3+architecture dedicated to early Barrett’s neoplasia was tested on these images. The AI system was neither trained with SCC images nor had it seen the test images prior to evaluation. The overlap between the three expert annotations („expert-agreement“) was the ground truth for evaluating AI performance.
Results
Barrett’s AI detected early SCC with a mean intersection over reference (IoR) of 92% when at least 1 pixel of the AI prediction overlapped with the expert-agreement. When the threshold was increased to 5%, 10%, and 20% overlap with the expert-agreement, the IoR was 88%, 85% and 82%, respectively. The mean Intersection Over Union (IoU) – a metric according to segmentation quality between the AI prediction and the expert-agreement – was 0.45. The mean expert IoU as a measure of agreement between the three experts was 0.60.
Conclusions
In the context of this pilot study, the predictions of SCC by a Barrett’s dedicated AI showed some overlap to the expert-agreement. Therefore, features learned from Barrett’s cancer-related training might be helpful also for SCC prediction. Our results allow different possible explanations. On the one hand, some Barrett’s cancer features generalize toward the related task of assessing early SCC. On the other hand, the Barrett’s AI is less specific to Barrett’s cancer than a general predictor of pathological tissue. However, we expect to enhance the detection quality significantly by extending the training to SCC-specific data. The insight of this study opens the way towards a transfer learning approach for more efficient training of AI to solve tasks in other domains.
Aims
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP) is the gold standard in the diagnosis as well as treatment of diseases of the pancreatobiliary tract. However, it is technically complex and has a relatively high complication rate. In particular, cannulation of the papillary ostium remains challenging. The aim of this study is to examine whether a deep-learning algorithm can be used to detect the major duodenal papilla and in particular the papillary ostium reliably and could therefore be a valuable tool for inexperienced endoscopists, particularly in training situation.
Methods
We analyzed a total of 654 retrospectively collected images of 85 patients. Both the major duodenal papilla and the ostium were then segmented. Afterwards, a neural network was trained using a deep-learning algorithm. A 5-fold cross-validation was performed. Subsequently, we ran the algorithm on 5 prospectively collected videos of ERCPs.
Results
5-fold cross-validation on the 654 labeled data resulted in an F1 value of 0.8007, a sensitivity of 0.8409 and a specificity of 0.9757 for the class papilla, and an F1 value of 0.5724, a sensitivity of 0.5456 and a specificity of 0.9966 for the class ostium. Regardless of the class, the average F1 value (class papilla and class ostium) was 0.6866, the sensitivity 0.6933 and the specificity 0.9861. In 100% of cases the AI-detected localization of the papillary ostium in the prospectively collected videos corresponded to the localization of the cannulation performed by the endoscopist.
Conclusions
In the present study, the neural network was able to identify the major duodenal papilla with a high sensitivity and high specificity. In detecting the papillary ostium, the sensitivity was notably lower. However, when used on videos, the AI was able to identify the location of the subsequent cannulation with 100% accuracy. In the future, the neural network will be trained with more data. Thus, a suitable tool for ERCP could be established, especially in the training situation.
Case study research is one of the most widely used research methods in Information Systems (IS). In recent years, an increasing number of publications have used case studies with few sources of evidence, such as single interviews per case. While there is much methodological guidance on rigorously conducting multiple case studies, it remains unclear how researchers can achieve an acceptable level of rigour for this emerging type of multiple case study with few sources of evidence, i.e., multiple mini case studies. In this context, we synthesise methodological guidance for multiple case study research from a cross-disciplinary perspective to develop an analytical framework. Furthermore, we calibrate this analytical framework to multiple mini case studies by reviewing previous IS publications that use multiple mini case studies to provide guidelines to conduct multiple mini case studies rigorously. We also offer a conceptual definition of multiple mini case studies, distinguish them from other research approaches, and position multiple mini case studies as a pragmatic and rigorous approach to research emerging and innovative phenomena in IS.
It remains difficult to segregate pelagic habitats since structuring processes are dynamic on a wide range of scales and clear boundaries in the open ocean are non-existent. However, to improve our knowledge about existing ecological niches and the processes shaping the enormous diversity of marine plankton, we need a better understanding of the driving forces behind plankton patchiness. Here we describe a new machine-learning method to detect and quantify pelagic habitats based on hydrographic measurements. An Autoencoder learns two-dimensional, meaningful representations of higher-dimensional micro-habitats, which are characterized by a variety of biotic and abiotic measurements from a high-speed ROTV. Subsequently, we apply a density-based clustering algorithm to group similar micro-habitats into associated pelagic macro-habitats in the German Bight of the North Sea. Three distinct macro-habitats, a “surface mixed layer,” a “bottom layer,” and an exceptionally “productive layer” are consistently identified, each with its distinct plankton community. We provide evidence that the model detects relevant features like the doming of the thermocline within an Offshore Wind Farm or the presence of a tidal mixing front.
Aims
Human-computer interactions (HCI) may have a relevant impact on the performance of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Studies show that although endoscopists assessing Barrett’s esophagus (BE) with AI improve their performance significantly, they do not achieve the level of the stand-alone performance of AI. One aspect of HCI is the impact of AI on the degree of certainty and confidence displayed by the endoscopist. Indirectly, diagnostic confidence when using AI may be linked to trust and acceptance of AI. In a BE video study, we aimed to understand the impact of AI on the diagnostic confidence of endoscopists and the possible correlation with diagnostic performance.
Methods
22 endoscopists from 12 centers with varying levels of BE experience reviewed ninety-six standardized endoscopy videos. Endoscopists were categorized into experts and non-experts and randomly assigned to assess the videos with and without AI. Participants were randomized in two arms: Arm A assessed videos first without AI and then with AI, while Arm B assessed videos in the opposite order. Evaluators were tasked with identifying BE-related neoplasia and rating their confidence with and without AI on a scale from 0 to 9.
Results
The utilization of AI in Arm A (without AI first, with AI second) significantly elevated confidence levels for experts and non-experts (7.1 to 8.0 and 6.1 to 6.6, respectively). Only non-experts benefitted from AI with a significant increase in accuracy (68.6% to 75.5%). Interestingly, while the confidence levels of experts without AI were higher than those of non-experts with AI, there was no significant difference in accuracy between these two groups (71.3% vs. 75.5%). In Arm B (with AI first, without AI second), experts and non-experts experienced a significant reduction in confidence (7.6 to 7.1 and 6.4 to 6.2, respectively), while maintaining consistent accuracy levels (71.8% to 71.8% and 67.5% to 67.1%, respectively).
Conclusions
AI significantly enhanced confidence levels for both expert and non-expert endoscopists. Endoscopists felt significantly more uncertain in their assessments without AI. Furthermore, experts with or without AI consistently displayed higher confidence levels than non-experts with AI, irrespective of comparable outcomes. These findings underscore the possible role of AI in improving diagnostic confidence during endoscopic assessment.
Effect of AI on performance of endoscopists to detect Barrett neoplasia: A Randomized Tandem Trial
()
Background and study aims
To evaluate the effect of an AI-based clinical decision support system (AI) on the performance and diagnostic confidence of endoscopists during the assessment of Barrett's esophagus (BE).
Patients and Methods
Ninety-six standardized endoscopy videos were assessed by 22 endoscopists from 12 different centers with varying degrees of BE experience.
The assessment was randomized into two video sets: Group A (review first without AI and second with AI) and group B (review first with AI and second without AI). Endoscopists were required to evaluate each video for the presence of Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia (BERN) and then decide on a spot for a targeted biopsy. After the second assessment, they were allowed to change their clinical decision and confidence level.
Results
AI had a standalone sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 92.2%, 68.9%, and 81.6%, respectively. Without AI, BE experts had an overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 83.3%, 58.1 and 71.5%, respectively. With AI, BE nonexperts showed a significant improvement in sensitivity and specificity when videos were assessed a second time with AI (sensitivity 69.7% (95% CI, 65.2% - 74.2%) to 78.0% (95% CI, 74.0% - 82.0%); specificity 67.3% (95% CI, 62.5% - 72.2%) to 72.7% (95 CI, 68.2% - 77.3%). In addition, the diagnostic confidence of BE nonexperts improved significantly with AI.
Conclusion
BE nonexperts benefitted significantly from the additional AI. BE experts and nonexperts remained below the standalone performance of AI, suggesting that there may be other factors influencing endoscopists to follow or discard AI advice.