Abstract:Title: A Systematic Review of Machine Learning-based Prognostic Models for Acute Pancreatitis: Towards Improving Methods and Reporting Quality Background: An accurate prognostic tool is essential to aid clinical decision making (e.g., patient triage) and to advance personalized medicine. However, such prognostic tool is lacking for acute pancreatitis (AP). Increasingly machine learning (ML) techniques are being used to develop high-performing prognostic models in AP. However, methodologic and reporting quality has received little attention. High-quality reporting and study methodology are critical to model validity, reproducibility, and clinical implementation. In collaboration with content experts in ML methodology, we performed a systematic review critically appraising the quality of methodology and reporting of recently published ML AP prognostic models. Methods: Using a validated search strategy, we identified ML AP studies from the databases MEDLINE, PubMed, and EMBASE published between January 2021 and December 2023. Eligibility criteria included all retrospective or prospective studies that developed or validated new or existing ML models in patients with AP that predicted an outcome following an episode of AP. Meta-analysis was considered if there was homogeneity in the study design and in the type of outcome predicted. For risk of bias (ROB) assessment, we used the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). Quality of reporting was assessed using the Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model of Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis – Artificial Intelligence (TRIPOD+AI) statement that defines standards for 27 items that should be reported in publications using ML prognostic models. Results: The search strategy identified 6480 publications of which 30 met the eligibility criteria. Studies originated from China (22), U.S (4), and other (4). All 30 studies developed a new ML model and none sought to validate an existing ML model, producing a total of 39 new ML models. AP severity (23/39) or mortality (6/39) were the most common outcomes predicted. The mean area-under-the-curve for all models and endpoints was 0.91 (SD 0.08). The ROB was high for at least one domain in all 39 models, particularly for the analysis domain (37/39 models). Steps were not taken to minimize over-optimistic model performance in 27/39 models. Due to heterogeneity in the study design and in how the outcomes were defined and determined, meta-analysis was not performed. Studies reported on only 15/27 items from TRIPOD+AI standards, with only 7/30 justifying sample size and 13/30 assessing data quality. Other reporting deficiencies included omissions regarding human-AI interaction (28/30), handling low-quality or incomplete data in practice (27/30), sharing analytical codes (25/30), study protocols (25/30) and reporting source data (19/30),. Discussion: There are significant deficiencies in the methodology and reporting of recently published ML based prognostic models in AP patients. These undermine the validity, reproducibility and implementation of these prognostic models despite their promise of superior predictive accuracy. Funding: none Registration: Research Registry (reviewregistry1727)

Panoramic imaging errors in machine learning model development: a systematic review

Panoramic radiograph quality assessment: Database and algorithm

Machine Learning Models for Pancreatic Cancer Risk Prediction Using Electronic Health Record Data - A Systematic Review and Assessment

Key Technology Considerations in Developing and Deploying Machine Learning Models in Clinical Radiology Practice

Enhanced Diagnostic Accuracy for Dental Caries and Anomalies in Panoramic Radiographs Using a Custom Deep Learning Model

Machine Learning Predictive Models for Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review.

Deep neural models for automated multi-task diagnostic scan management—quality enhancement, view classification and report generation

Machine Learning and Bias in Medical Imaging: Opportunities and Challenges

Deep learning with convolution neural network detecting mesiodens on panoramic radiographs: comparing four models

Key concepts, common pitfalls, and best practices in artificial intelligence and machine learning: focus on radiomics

Factors influencing clinician and patient interaction with machine learning-based risk prediction models: a systematic review

Machine learning for medical imaging: methodological failures and recommendations for the future

Reproducibility and Explainability of Deep Learning in Mammography: A Systematic Review of Literature

MRI deep learning models for assisted diagnosis of knee pathologies: a systematic review

Common pitfalls and recommendations for using machine learning to detect and prognosticate for COVID-19 using chest radiographs and CT scans

A Systematic Review of Machine Learning-based Prognostic Models for Acute Pancreatitis: Towards Improving Methods and Reporting Quality

Accuracy of machine learning in the diagnosis of odontogenic cysts and tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Deep learning for pancreatic diseases based on endoscopic ultrasound: A systematic review

Data-centric artificial intelligence in oncology: a systematic review assessing data quality in machine learning models for head and neck cancer

Errors in Radiology: A Standard Review

A review of deep learning and radiomics approaches for pancreatic cancer diagnosis from medical imaging