The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Automated deep learning design for medical image classification by health-care professionals with no coding experience: a feasibility study
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Deep learning has the potential to transform health care; however, substantial expertise is required to train such models. We sought to evaluate the utility of automated deep learning software to develop medical image diagnostic classifiers by health-care professionals with no coding-and no deep learning-expertise. METHODS: We used five publicly available open-source datasets: retinal fundus images (MESSIDOR); optical coherence tomography (OCT) images (Guangzhou Medical University and Shiley Eye Institute, version 3); images of skin lesions (Human Against Machine [HAM] 10000), and both paediatric and adult chest x-ray (CXR) images (Guangzhou Medical University and Shiley Eye Institute, version 3 and the National Institute of Health [NIH] dataset, respectively) to separately feed into a neural architecture search framework, hosted through Google Cloud AutoML, that automatically developed a deep learning architecture to classify common diseases. Sensitivity (recall), specificity, and positive predictive value (precision) were used to evaluate the diagnostic properties of the models. The discriminative performance was assessed using the area under the precision recall curve (AUPRC). In the case of the deep learning model developed on a subset of the HAM10000 dataset, we did external validation using the Edinburgh Dermofit Library dataset. FINDINGS: Diagnostic properties and discriminative performance from internal validations were high in the binary classification tasks (sensitivity 73·3-97·0%; specificity 67-100%; AUPRC 0·87-1·00). In the multiple classification tasks, the diagnostic properties ranged from 38% to 100% for sensitivity and from 67% to 100% for specificity. The discriminative performance in terms of AUPRC ranged from 0·57 to 1·00 in the five automated deep learning models. In an external validation using the Edinburgh Dermofit Library dataset, the automated deep learning model showed an AUPRC of 0·47, with a sensitivity of 49% and a positive predictive value of 52%. INTERPRETATION: All models, except the automated deep learning model trained on the multilabel classification task of the NIH CXR14 dataset, showed comparable discriminative performance and diagnostic properties to state-of-the-art performing deep learning algorithms. The performance in the external validation study was low. The quality of the open-access datasets (including insufficient information about patient flow and demographics) and the absence of measurement for precision, such as confidence intervals, constituted the major limitations of this study. The availability of automated deep learning platforms provide an opportunity for the medical community to enhance their understanding in model development and evaluation. Although the derivation of classification models without requiring a deep understanding of the mathematical, statistical, and programming principles is attractive, comparable performance to expertly designed models is limited to more elementary classification tasks. Furthermore, care should be placed in adhering to ethical principles when using these automated models to avoid discrimination and causing harm. Future studies should compare several application programming interfaces on thoroughly curated datasets. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research and Moorfields Eye Charity.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks
Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., & Hinton, G. E. (2017) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/3065386 · Cited by 112,155
LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., & Hinton, G. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14539 · Cited by 84,126
Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning
Mnih, V., Kavukcuoglu, K., Silver, D., Rusu, A. A., Veness, J., Bellemare, M. G., Graves, A., Riedmiller, M., Fidjeland, A. K., Ostrovski, G., et al. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14236 · Cited by 30,357
Hinton, G., Deng, L., Yu, D., Dahl, G., Mohamed, A.-R., Jaitly, N., Senior, A., Vanhoucke, V., Nguyen, P., Sainath, T., et al. (2012) · IEEE Signal Processing Magazine · doi:10.1109/msp.2012.2205597 · Cited by 10,260
Show and tell: A neural image caption generator
Vinyals, O., Toshev, A., Bengio, S., & Erhan, D. (2015) · 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2015.7298935 · Cited by 6,318
Lipton, Z. C. (2018) · Queue · doi:10.1145/3236386.3241340 · Cited by 5,427
Natural Language Processing (almost) from Scratch
Collobert, R., Weston, J., Bottou, L., Karlen, M., Kavukcuoglu, K., & Kuksa, P. P. (2011) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1103.0398 · Cited by 4,962
Identifying Medical Diagnoses and Treatable Diseases by Image-Based Deep Learning
Kermany, D. S., Goldbaum, M., Cai, W., Valentim, C. C. S., Liang, H., Baxter, S. L., McKeown, A., Yang, G., Wu, X., Yan, F., et al. (2018) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2018.02.010 · Cited by 4,842
Wang, X., Peng, Y., Lu, L., Lu, Z., Bagheri, M., & Summers, R. M. (2017) · 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2017.369 · Cited by 4,616
Collins, G. S., Reitsma, J. B., Altman, D. G., & Moons, K. G. M. (2015) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.g7594 · Cited by 4,388
Cited by
Challenges in deploying machine learning: A survey of case studies
Paleyes, A., Urma, R.-G., & Lawrence, N. D. (2023) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3533378 · Cited by 638
MedMNIST Classification Decathlon: A Lightweight AutoML Benchmark for Medical Image Analysis
Yang, J., Shi, R., & Ni, B. (2021) · 2021 IEEE 18th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI) · doi:10.1109/isbi48211.2021.9434062 · Cited by 414
Hossain, E., Rana, R., Higgins, N., Soar, J., Barua, P. D., Pisani, A. R., & Turner, K. (2023) · Computers in Biology and Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.compbiomed.2023.106649 · Cited by 407
A Systematic Review of the Barriers to the Implementation of Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Ahmed, M. I., Spooner, B., Isherwood, J., Lane, M., Orrock, E., & Dennison, A. (2023) · Cureus · doi:10.7759/cureus.46454 · Cited by 364
Recent Advancements in Emerging Technologies for Healthcare Management Systems: A Survey
Junaid, S. B., Imam, A. A., Balogun, A. O., De Silva, L. C., Surakat, Y. A., Kumar, G., Abdulkarim, M., Shuaibu, A. N., Garba, A., Sahalu, Y., et al. (2022) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare10101940 · Cited by 353
Metadata
- Authors
- Faes, L., Wagner, S. K., Fu, D. J., Liu, X., Korot, E., Ledsam, J. R., Back, T., Chopra, R., Pontikos, N., Kern, C., Moraes, G., Schmid, M. K., Sim, D., Balaskas, K., Bachmann, L. M., Denniston, A. K., & Keane, P. A.
- Venue
- The Lancet Digital Health
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-09
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- e232-e242
- ISSN
- 2589-7500 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2972198316
- Cited by
- 308
- References
- 32
- FWCI
- 9.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Automated deep learning design for medical image classification by health-care professionals with no coding experience: a feasibility study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s2589-7500(19)30108-6
- The paper
- Faes, L., Wagner, S. K., Fu, D. J., Liu, X., Korot, E., Ledsam, J. R., Back, T., Chopra, R., Pontikos, N., Kern, C., Moraes, G., Schmid, M. K., Sim, D., Balaskas, K., Bachmann, L. M., Denniston, A. K., & Keane, P. A. (2019). Automated deep learning design for medical image classification by health-care professionals with no coding experience: a feasibility study. The Lancet Digital Health. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2589-7500(19)30108-6
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.