An independent, multi-country head-to-head accuracy comparison of automated chest x-ray algorithms for the triage of pulmonary tuberculosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Computer-aided detection (CAD) algorithms for automated chest X-ray (CXR) reading have been endorsed by the World Health Organization for tuberculosis (TB) triage, but independent, multi-country assessment and comparison of current products are needed to guide implementation. Methods: We conducted a head-to-head evaluation of five CAD algorithms for TB triage across seven countries. We included CXRs from adults who presented to outpatient facilities with at least two weeks of cough in India, Madagascar, the Philippines, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, and Vietnam. The participants completed a standard evaluation for pulmonary TB, including sputum collection for Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra and culture. Against a microbiological reference standard, we calculated and compared the accuracy overall, by country and key groups for five CAD algorithms: CAD4TB (Delft Imaging), INSIGHT CXR (Lunit), DrAid (Vinbrain), Genki (Deeptek), and qXR (qure.AI). We determined the area under the ROC curve (AUC) and if any CAD product could achieve the minimum target accuracy for a TB triage test (≥90% sensitivity and ≥70% specificity). We then applied country- and population-specific thresholds and recalculated accuracy to assess any improvement in performance. Results: Of 3,927 individuals included, the median age was 41 years (IQR 29-54), 12.9% were people living with HIV (PLWH), 8.2% living with diabetes, and 21.2% had a prior history of TB. The overall AUC ranged from 0.774-0.819, and specificity ranged from 64.8-73.8% at 90% sensitivity. CAD4TB had the highest overall accuracy (73.8% specific, 95% CI 72.2-75.4, at 90% sensitivity), although qXR and INSIGHT CXR also achieved the target 70% specificity. There was heterogeneity in accuracy by country, and females and PLWH had lower sensitivity while males and people with a history of TB had lower specificity. The performance remained stable regardless of diabetes status. When country- and population-specific thresholds were applied, at least one CAD product could achieve or approach the target accuracy for each country and sub-group, except for PLWH and those with a history of TB. Conclusions: Multiple CAD algorithms can achieve or exceed the minimum target accuracy for a TB triage test, with improvement when using setting- or population-specific thresholds. Further efforts are needed to integrate CAD into routine TB case detection programs in high-burden communities.
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 | 0.020 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".