Early user experience and lessons learned using ultra-portable digital X-ray with computer-aided detection (DXR-CAD) products: A qualitative study from the perspective of healthcare providers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent technological and radiological advances have renewed interest in using X-rays to screen and triage people with tuberculosis (TB). The miniaturization of digital X-ray (DXR), combined with automatic interpretation using computer-aided detection (CAD) software can extend the reach of DXR screening interventions for TB. This qualitative study assessed early implementers' experiences and lessons learned when using ultra-portable (UP) DXR systems integrated with CAD software to screen and triage TB. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with project staff and healthcare workers at six pilot sites. Transcripts were coded and analyzed using a framework approach. The themes that emerged were subsequently organized and presented using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). RESULTS: There were 26 interviewees with varying roles: supervisory, clinicians, radiographers, and radiologists. Participants recognized the portability as the main advantage, but criticize that it involves several compromises on throughput, internet dependence, manoeuvrability, and stability, as well as suitability for patients with larger body sizes. Furthermore, compared to using hardware and software from the same supplier and without digital health information systems, complexity increases with interoperability between hardware and software, and between different electronic health information systems. Currently, there is a limited capacity to implement these technologies, especially due to the need for threshold selection, and lack of guidance on radiation protection suitable for UP DXR machines. Finally, the respondents stressed the importance of having protected means of sharing patient medical data, as well as comprehensive support and warranty plans. CONCLUSION: Study findings suggest that UP DXR with CAD was overall well received to decentralize radiological assessment for TB, however, the improved portability involved programmatic compromises. The main barriers to uptake included insufficient capacity and lack of guidance on radiation protection suitable for UP DXR.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".