Impact of Radiologist Experience on AI Annotation Quality in Chest Radiographs: A Comparative Analysis

<b>Background/Objectives</b>: In the burgeoning field of medical imaging and Artificial Intelligence (AI), high-quality annotations for training AI-models are crucial. However, there are still only a few large datasets, as segmentation is time-consuming, experts have limited time. This study investigates how the experience of radiologists affects the quality of annotations. <b>Methods</b>: We randomly collected 53 anonymized chest radiographs. Fifteen readers with varying levels of expertise annotated the anatomical structures of different complexity, pneumonic opacities and central venous catheters (CVC) as examples of pathologies and foreign material. The readers were divided into three groups of five. The groups consisted of medical students (MS), junior professionals (JP) with less than five years of working experience and senior professionals (SP) with more than five years of experience. Each annotation was compared to a gold standard consisting of a consensus annotation of three senior board-certified radiologists. We calculated the Dice coefficient (DSC) and Hausdorff distance (HD) to evaluate annotation quality. Inter- and intrareader variability and time dependencies were investigated using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and Ordinary Least Squares (OLS). <b>Results</b>: Senior professionals generally showed better performance, while medical students had higher variability in their annotations. Significant differences were noted, especially for complex structures (DSC Pneumonic Opacities as mean [standard deviation]: MS: 0.516 [0.246]; SP: 0.631 [0.211]). However, it should be noted that overall deviation and intraclass variance was higher for these structures even for seniors, highlighting the inherent limitations of conventional radiography. Experience showed a positive relationship with annotation quality for VCS and lung but was not a significant factor for other structures. <b>Conclusions</b>: Experience level significantly impacts annotation quality. Senior radiologists provided higher-quality annotations for complex structures, while less experienced readers could still annotate simpler structures with satisfying accuracy. We suggest a mixed-expertise approach, enabling the highly experienced to utilize their knowledge most effectively. With the increase in numbers of examinations, radiology will rely on AI support tools in the future. Therefore, economizing the process of data acquisition and AI-training; for example, by integrating less experienced radiologists, will help to meet the coming challenges.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Diagnostics
Published
2025-03-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics15060777
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.65
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Impact of Radiologist Experience on AI Annotation Quality in Chest Radiographs: A Comparative Analysis

Axel Saalbach, Heinrich Schulz, Malte Maria Sieren, Jörg Barkhausen et al.
1 citations
Diagnostics
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
0.65
article

Impact of Radiologist Experience on AI Annotation Quality in Chest Radiographs: A Comparative Analysis

Axel Saalbach, Heinrich Schulz, Malte Maria Sieren, Jörg Barkhausen, Lasse Hansen, Mattias P. Heinrich‬, Lennart Berkel, Franz Wegner, Malte Michel Multusch
article en
1 citations

Abstract

<b>Background/Objectives</b>: In the burgeoning field of medical imaging and Artificial Intelligence (AI), high-quality annotations for training AI-models are crucial. However, there are still only a few large datasets, as segmentation is time-consuming, experts have limited time. This study investigates how the experience of radiologists affects the quality of annotations. <b>Methods</b>: We randomly collected 53 anonymized chest radiographs. Fifteen readers with varying levels of expertise annotated the anatomical structures of different complexity, pneumonic opacities and central venous catheters (CVC) as examples of pathologies and foreign material. The readers were divided into three groups of five. The groups consisted of medical students (MS), junior professionals (JP) with less than five years of working experience and senior professionals (SP) with more than five years of experience. Each annotation was compared to a gold standard consisting of a consensus annotation of three senior board-certified radiologists. We calculated the Dice coefficient (DSC) and Hausdorff distance (HD) to evaluate annotation quality. Inter- and intrareader variability and time dependencies were investigated using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and Ordinary Least Squares (OLS). <b>Results</b>: Senior professionals generally showed better performance, while medical students had higher variability in their annotations. Significant differences were noted, especially for complex structures (DSC Pneumonic Opacities as mean [standard deviation]: MS: 0.516 [0.246]; SP: 0.631 [0.211]). However, it should be noted that overall deviation and intraclass variance was higher for these structures even for seniors, highlighting the inherent limitations of conventional radiography. Experience showed a positive relationship with annotation quality for VCS and lung but was not a significant factor for other structures. <b>Conclusions</b>: Experience level significantly impacts annotation quality. Senior radiologists provided higher-quality annotations for complex structures, while less experienced readers could still annotate simpler structures with satisfying accuracy. We suggest a mixed-expertise approach, enabling the highly experienced to utilize their knowledge most effectively. With the increase in numbers of examinations, radiology will rely on AI support tools in the future. Therefore, economizing the process of data acquisition and AI-training; for example, by integrating less experienced radiologists, will help to meet the coming challenges.

DiagnosticsVol. 15(6)
Universitäres Kinderwunschzentrum Lübeck (DE), Philips (Germany) (DE), University of Lübeck (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 27%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
0.65
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.