Back to research feed

Journal of clinical imaging science

February 14, 2026 · via Europe PMC

Evaluating the diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence-assisted decision-making software for pulmonary nodules in a resource-limited setting.

Liao X, Tian Y, Cheng Y, Sun X, Li Y, Zhao Z, Yao C, Chen D.

research-articleOpen access

AI summary — for doctors, generated from the abstract only

AI decision-support software improved pulmonary nodule malignancy assessment by physicians in a resource-limited hospital, raising average AUC from 0.78 to 0.89.

What was studied

Retrospective multi-reader multi-case study of 3 pulmonologists and 3 radiologists at a secondary hospital reading 200 enriched CT scans (100 benign, 100 malignant) with and without AI.

Key findings

  • Average AUC 0.78 to 0.89 (difference 0.11)
  • At 5% threshold, sensitivity 97.3% with AI and specificity improved 18.5%
  • At 65% threshold, sensitivity +21.2% and specificity +7.8%
  • Inter-reader agreement on management improved from 0.19 to 0.40

Clinical relevance

This suggests AI support may improve nodule management in settings with limited radiology expertise, pending prospective real-world validation.

Who should care

Radiodiagnosis/Radiology

Limitations

Enriched 50% malignancy dataset; retrospective reader study.

AI can lift nodule assessment quality where radiology expertise is scarce.

This is an AI-generated summary of the published abstract, not a clinical recommendation. It may not reflect the full text or subsequent updates — verify against the original source before acting on it.

Abstract

Objectives

Emerging evidence suggested that artificial intelligence (AI) may offer particular benefits in resource-limited clinical settings with high patient loads and constrained radiology expertise. The present study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of an AI-assisted decision-making software (DMS) for pulmonary nodules detected on computed tomography (CT) among physicians in a resource-limited clinical setting.

Material and methods

In this retrospective multi-reader, multi-case study, three pulmonologists and three radiologists from a secondary hospital independently assessed 200 enriched chest CT scans with and without AI-assisted DMS. The dataset was balanced with 100 benign and 100 malignant nodules to provide a consistent challenge for both physicians and the AI system. Diagnostic performance was measured by comparing the average area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) with and without AI support. Sensitivity and specificity were evaluated at the 5% and 65% malignancy thresholds, and inter-reader agreement on disease management plans was examined.

Results

AI-assisted DMS significantly improved readers' diagnostic performance, with the average AUC increasing from 0.78 to 0.89 (mean difference: 0.11, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.08, 0.14). Improvements were consistent across readers' experience levels and specialties. Sensitivity at the 5% malignancy threshold reached 97.3% (95% CI: 95.1%, 99.6%) with AI assistance, while specificity improved by 18.5% (95% CI: 6.5%, 30.5%). At the 65% threshold, sensitivity and specificity increased by 21.2% and 7.8%, respectively. In addition, the overall inter-reader agreement enhanced from 0.19 to 0.40 (p < 0.01), although agreement on non-surgical diagnostic procedures remained relatively lower compared to other categories.

Conclusion

AI-assisted DMS showed great potential in improving diagnostic performance for CT pulmonary nodule management in the resource-limited setting. Strengthening referral pathways for intermediate-risk cases might further support appropriate clinical decision-making and help align patient evaluation with available expertise. Continued prospective real-world studies with longitudinal follow-up and histopathological confirmation would contribute to expanding the evidence base and guiding its broader integration into routine clinical practice.

DOI

10.25259/jcis_212_2025

PMID

41783476

PMCID

PMC12954265

Research metadata (titles, abstracts, authors, publication dates) is sourced from Europe PMC, which aggregates content from PubMed/MEDLINE, PubMed Central, and other providers under the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM/NCBI). NLM does not claim copyright on abstracts; the original journal publishers or authors may hold rights to the full articles. AI-generated summaries are derived only from the abstract, never the full text, and are always labeled as AI-generated.

Want more like this?

Browse more from the feed. A free account unlocks the full feed, saving and communities.

Back to the research feed

Create a free account · Sign in