Cox II GA, Jackson CS, Vega KJ. Artificial intelligence as a means to improve recognition of gastrointestinal angiodysplasia in video capsule endoscopy. Artif Intell Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 2(4): 179-184 [DOI: 10.37126/aige.v2.i4.179]
Reader's ID:
05755618
Submitted on:
September 16, 2021, 14:22
Reader Expertise:
Reader’s expertise on the topic of the manuscript
Conflicts-of-Interest Statement:
Does the reader have a conflict of interest?
Reader Comment Standards for Published Articles:
1 Title
Does the title reflect the main subject/hypothesis of the manuscript?
2 Abstract
Does the abstract summarize and reflect the work described in the manuscript?
3 Key Words
Do the key words reflect the focus of the manuscript?
4 Background
Does the manuscript adequately describe the background, present status and significance of the study?
5 Methods
Does the manuscript describe methods (e.g., experiments, data analysis, surveys, and clinical trials, etc.) in adequate detail?
6 Results
Are the research objectives achieved by the experiments used in this study?
Has the study made meaningful contributions towards research progress in this field?
7 Discussion
Does the manuscript interpret the findings adequately and appropriately, highlighting the key points concisely, clearly and logically?
Are the findings and their applicability/relevance to the literature stated in a clear and definite manner?
Is the Discussion accurate and does it discuss the paper’s scientific significance and/or relevance to clinical practice sufficiently?
8 Illustrations and Tables
Are the figures, diagrams and tables sufficient, good quality and appropriately illustrative of the paper contents?
Do figures require labeling with arrows, asterisks, etc., or better legends?
9 Biostatistics
Does the manuscript meet the requirements of biostatistics?
10 Units
Does the manuscript meet the requirements of use of SI units?
11 References
Does the manuscript appropriately cite the latest, important and authoritative references in the Introduction and Discussion sections?
Does the author self-cite, omit, incorrectly cite and/or over-cite references?
12 Quality of manuscript organization and presentation
Is the manuscript concisely and coherently organized and presented?
Are the style, language and grammar accurate and appropriate?
13 Ethics statements
For all manuscripts involving human studies and/or animal experiments, author(s) must submit the related formal ethics documents that were reviewed and approved by their local ethical review committee. Did the manuscript meet the requirements of ethics?
Scientific Quality:
The overall quality of the manuscript, based on the above-listed criteria, should be evaluated and classified according to the following five categories
Language Quality:
Language quality (style, grammar, and spelling) should be evaluated and classified according to the following five categories.
Reader Comments:
I am interested in reading an article with Cox II GA et al. Diagnostic reading of capsule endoscopy is challenging and has a consistent risk of readers missing significant findings. Currently, artificial intelligence (AI) has exceeded human image recognition abilities. The authors stated that artificial intelligence in VCE has improved GIAD detection. The diagnostic performance of a CADx algorithm, SSD, and ROI is almost over 90% of AUC on GIAD detection. I agree with their opinions. However, AI’s selection is based on the so-called “black box.” It is not easy to indicate the groups on the AI-decision made, and humans cannot understand it. The human physician can only answer, “the result is according to AI,” to the patient. As a result, the responsibility for diagnosis is unclear, and ethical issues must be resolved. In addition, current research is based on retrospective studies. Therefore, prospective studies using full-video capsule endoscopy and suitable DL architectures in multicenter settings are necessary.
Reply from the Editorial Office:
First, thank you very much for your professional comments on the article published in Artificial Intelligence in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
Second, we read your comments with great interest. You are welcome to format your valuable comments into a Letter to the Editor and submit it online to Artificial Intelligence in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy at https://www.f6publishing.com. There are no restrictions on the number of words, figures (color, B/W) or authors for a Letter to the Editor. In addition, the article processing charge will be exempted for this Letter to the Editor. As with all articles published by the Baishideng Publishing Group, the Letter to the Editor will be published online after completing peer review. The guidelines for a Letter to the Editor can be found at: https://www.wjgnet.com/bpg/GerInfo/219.
Finally, we look forward to receiving your high-quality Letter to the Editor, which will promote academic communication and lead the development of this discipline.