Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Checklist for Reproducibility of Deep Learning in Medical Imaging
9
Zitationen
19
Autoren
2024
Jahr
Abstract
The application of deep learning (DL) in medicine introduces transformative tools with the potential to enhance prognosis, diagnosis, and treatment planning. However, ensuring transparent documentation is essential for researchers to enhance reproducibility and refine techniques. Our study addresses the unique challenges presented by DL in medical imaging by developing a comprehensive checklist using the Delphi method to enhance reproducibility and reliability in this dynamic field. We compiled a preliminary checklist based on a comprehensive review of existing checklists and relevant literature. A panel of 11 experts in medical imaging and DL assessed these items using Likert scales, with two survey rounds to refine responses and gauge consensus. We also employed the content validity ratio with a cutoff of 0.59 to determine item face and content validity. Round 1 included a 27-item questionnaire, with 12 items demonstrating high consensus for face and content validity that were then left out of round 2. Round 2 involved refining the checklist, resulting in an additional 17 items. In the last round, 3 items were deemed non-essential or infeasible, while 2 newly suggested items received unanimous agreement for inclusion, resulting in a final 26-item DL model reporting checklist derived from the Delphi process. The 26-item checklist facilitates the reproducible reporting of DL tools and enables scientists to replicate the study's results.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
2021 · 85.000 Zit.
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement
2009 · 82.791 Zit.
PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation
2018 · 37.057 Zit.
RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
2019 · 28.303 Zit.
Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement
2015 · 25.912 Zit.
Autoren
Institutionen
- Mayo Clinic(US)
- WinnMed(US)
- Mayo Clinic in Florida(US)
- Emory Healthcare(US)
- Emory University(US)
- NYU Langone Health(US)
- Universidade Federal de São Paulo(BR)
- Thomas Jefferson University Hospital(US)
- Lurie Children's Hospital(US)
- Georgetown University(US)
- MedStar Georgetown University Hospital(US)
- Vanderbilt University(US)
- Philips (United States)(US)
- IPS Research (United States)(US)