MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387381098 · doi:10.1186/s44263-023-00017-2

Comparing tuberculosis symptom screening to chest X-ray with artificial intelligence in an active case finding campaign in Northeast Nigeria

2023· article· en· W4387381098 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Stephen John, Suraj Abdulkarim, Salisu Usman, Md. Toufiq Rahman

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Global and Public Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 diagnosis using AI
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGlobal Affairs Canada
KeywordsTuberculosisActive tuberculosisMedicineCase findingMedical physicsMycobacterium tuberculosisPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Ultra-portable X-ray devices with artificial intelligence (AI) are increasingly used to screen for tuberculosis (TB). Few studies have documented their performance. We aimed to evaluate the performance of chest X-ray (CXR) and symptom screening for active case finding of TB among remote populations using ultra-portable X-ray and AI. METHODS: We organized screening camps in rural northeast Nigeria, and all consenting individuals ≥ 15 years were screened for TB symptoms (cough, fever, night sweats, and weight loss) and received a CXR. We used a MinXray Impact system interpreted by AI (qXR V3), which is a wireless setup and can be run without electricity. We collected sputum samples from individuals with an qXR abnormality score of 0.30 or higher or if they reported any TB symptoms. Samples were tested with Xpert MTB/RIF. We documented the TB screening cascade and evaluated the performance of screening with different combinations of symptoms and CXR interpreted by AI. RESULTS: We screened 5297 individuals during 66 camps: 2684 (51%) were females, and 2613 (49%) were males. Using ≥ 2 weeks of cough to define presumptive TB, 1056 people (20%) would be identified. If a cough of any duration was used, the number with presumptive TB increased to 1889 (36%) and to 3083 (58%) if any of the four symptoms were used. Overall, 769 (14.5%) had abnormality scores of 0.3 or higher, and 447 (8.4%) had a score of 0.5 or higher. We collected 1021 samples for Xpert testing and detected 85 (8%) individuals with TB. Screening for prolonged cough only identified 40% of people with TB. Any symptom detected 90.6% of people with TB, but specificity was 11.4%. Using an AI abnormality score of 0.50 identified 89.4% of people with TB with a specificity of 62.8%. CONCLUSIONS: Ultra-portable CXR can be used to provide more efficient TB screening in hard-to-reach areas. Symptom screening missed large proportions of people with bacteriologically confirmed TB. Employing AI to read CXR can improve triaging when human readers are unavailable and can save expensive diagnostic testing costs.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.137
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Global and Public HealthSame topicCOVID-19 diagnosis using AIFrench-language works237,207