External validation study demonstrates improved diagnostic performance using AI assistance in intracranial hemorrhage classification.
Background Early identification of the etiology of spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) could significantly contribute to planning a suitable treatment strategy. A notable radiomics-based artificial intelligence (AI) model for classifying causes of spontaneous ICH from brain computed tomography scans has been previously proposed. Objective This study aimed to externally validate and assess the utility of this AI model. Methods This study used 69 computed tomography scans from a separate cohort to evaluate the AI model’s performance in classifying nontraumatic ICHs into primary, tumorous, and vascular malformation related. We also assessed the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of clinicians, radiologists, and trainees in identifying the ICH causes before and after using the model’s assistance. The performances were statistically analyzed by specialty and expertise levels. Results The AI model achieved an overall accuracy of 0.65 in classifying the 3 causes of ICH. The model’s assistance improved overall diagnostic performance, narrowing the gap between nonradiology and radiology groups, as well as between trainees and experts. The accuracy increased from 0.68 to 0.72, from 0.72 to 0.76, from 0.69 to 0.74, and from 0.72 to 0.75 for nonradiologists, radiologists, trainees, and specialists, respectively. With the model’s support, radiology professionals demonstrated the highest accuracy, highlighting the model’s potential to enhance diagnostic consistency across different levels. Conclusions When applied to an external dataset, the accuracy of the AI model in categorizing spontaneous ICHs based on radiomics decreased. However, using the model as an assistant substantially improved the performance of all reader groups, including trainees and radiology and nonradiology specialists.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Angkurawaranon et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: