Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
March 25, 2020BMJOpen Access

Artificial intelligence versus clinicians: systematic review of design, reporting standards, and claims of deep learning studies

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Authors

MNMyura NagendranImperial College LondonYCYang ChenNanjing Tech UniversityCLChristopher A. LovejoyUniversity of Lausanne

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Cite This Study

Nagendran et al. (2020) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6986594cbaaf5c50b99b37dehttps://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m689
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Exaggerations and Caveats in Press Releases and Health-Related Science News2016 · 161 citations
  2. 2Deep neural networks show an equivalent and often superior performance to dermatologists in onychomycosis diagnosis: Automatic construction of onychomycosis datasets by region-based convolutional deep neural network2018 · 309 citations
  3. 3COX-2 Inhibitors — Lessons in Drug Safety2005 · 242 citations
  4. 4Diagnostic Efficacy and Therapeutic Decision-making Capacity of an Artificial Intelligence Platform for Childhood Cataracts in Eye Clinics: A Multicentre Randomized Controlled Trial2019 · 200 citations
  5. 5Uniformity in measuring adherence to reporting guidelines: the example of TRIPOD for assessing completeness of reporting of prediction model studies2019 · 120 citations