MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395034700 · doi:10.1055/s-0044-1782859

Human-Computer Interaction: Impact of Artificial Intelligence on the diagnostic confidence of endoscopists assessing videos of Barrett’s esophagus

2024· article· en· W4395034700 on OpenAlexaff
D Röser, M. Meinikheim, Robert Mendel, Christoph Palm, Andreas Probst, Anna Muzalyova, Markus W. Scheppach, Sandra Nagl, Elisabeth Schnoy, Christoph Römmele, Dominik Schulz, J. Schlottmann, F. Prinz, David Rauber, Tobias Rückert, Tomoaki Matsumura, Glòria Fernández‐Esparrach, Nour Parsa, Michael F. Byrne, H Messmann, Alanna Ebigbo

Bibliographic record

VenueEndoscopy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal Cancer Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEsophagusBarrett's esophagusConfidence intervalArtificial intelligenceMedical physicsGeneral surgeryRadiologySurgeryInternal medicineAdenocarcinomaComputer scienceCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims Human-computer interactions (HCI) may have a relevant impact on the performance of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Studies show that although endoscopists assessing Barrett's esophagus (BE) with AI improve their performance significantly, they do not achieve the level of the stand-alone performance of AI. One aspect of HCI is the impact of AI on the degree of certainty and confidence displayed by the endoscopist. Indirectly, diagnostic confidence when using AI may be linked to trust and acceptance of AI. In a BE video study, we aimed to understand the impact of AI on the diagnostic confidence of endoscopists and the possible correlation with diagnostic performance.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.363 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEndoscopySame topicEsophageal Cancer Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207