瑞典的一項研究顯示，人工智能可以 “可靠地” 從醫(yī)學(xué)檢測圖像中識別出乳腺癌。來自瑞典隆德大學(xué)的研究人員發(fā)現(xiàn)，計算機(jī)輔助檢測能夠以與兩位放射科醫(yī)生一同評估篩查圖像 “相似的效率” 發(fā)現(xiàn)癌癥。

There is growing interest in how AI could transform healthcare. The idea of using it to help with breast cancer?screening?is one of the major areas of interest.

人們對可以如何運用人工智能來改造醫(yī)療保健服務(wù)的興趣日益濃厚。使用人工智能幫助篩查乳腺癌的想法是人們感興趣的主要領(lǐng)域之一。

Previously, studies have shown benefit, and this latest research, led by a team at Lund University, adds to that by directly comparing the performance of human experts and AI?head-to-head?for the first time. It found AI could?spot?cancer at a similar rate to two?radiologists?and produce the same number of?false positives?– where a scan is incorrectly diagnosed as?abnormal.

此前的研究已顯示出人工智能在這方面有用處，而這項由瑞典隆德大學(xué)的團(tuán)隊領(lǐng)頭的最新研究則通過首次直接對比人類專家與人工智能的表現(xiàn)，進(jìn)一步證明了這一點。該研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，人工智能檢查出癌癥的效率與兩位放射科醫(yī)生一同評估篩查圖像的效率相似，得出假陽性誤報的數(shù)量也一致，假陽性指檢測掃描被誤診為異常。

But the researchers will have to follow the?trial?participants?for another two years to discover whether AI is better than humans and not missing cancers that should be?picked up. The lead researcher, Dr Kristina Lang, said the findings certainly suggested AI could potentially have an important role to play.

但是研究人員必須再跟蹤試驗參與者兩年的時間，以發(fā)現(xiàn)人工智能是否強(qiáng)過人類，并且不會遺漏本應(yīng)被發(fā)現(xiàn)的癌癥病例。首席研究員克里斯蒂娜·朗博士表示，這些研究發(fā)現(xiàn)無疑顯示出人工智能有可能發(fā)揮重要作用。

UK experts say while AI could never replace radiologists, its use offered huge promise, as a radiologist?armed?with the?data insight?and accuracy of AI could be a?formidable?force in patient care.

英國的專家稱，盡管人工智能永遠(yuǎn)無法取代放射科醫(yī)生，但是它的運用提供了巨大的發(fā)展?jié)摿Γ驗橐晃痪哂腥斯ぶ悄軒淼臄?shù)據(jù)洞察力和準(zhǔn)確性的放射科醫(yī)生可能會成為患者護(hù)理領(lǐng)域的強(qiáng)大力量。

詞匯表

screening 檢測，篩查
head-to-head 正面交鋒，一對一較量
spot 發(fā)現(xiàn)，看出
radiologists 放射科醫(yī)生
false positive 假陽性，實際非陽性但檢驗結(jié)果呈陽性
abnormal 不正常，異常
trial participants 試驗參與者，試驗對象
picked up 被發(fā)現(xiàn)
armed 裝備著，具有
data insight 數(shù)據(jù)洞察，通過分析研究數(shù)據(jù)而得到的深度理解
formidable 強(qiáng)大的，令人敬畏的

閱讀理解：請在讀完上文后，回答下列問題。

1. How is this research different to previous studies?

2. True or False??AI spots more false positives than radiologists do.

3. Why do trial participants need to be followed for two more years?

4. Why could the use of AI offer 'huge promise', although it can never replace radiologists?

答案

1. How is this research different to previous studies?

This latest research?directly compares the performance of human experts and AI head-to-head for the first time.

2. True or False??AI spots more false positives than radiologists do.

False.?It found AI could spot cancer at a similar rate to two radiologists and produce the same number of false positives.

3. Why do trial participants need to be followed for two more years?

The researchers will have to follow the trial participants for another two years to discover whether AI is better than humans and not missing cancers that should be picked up.

4. Why could the use of AI offer 'huge promise', although it can never replace radiologists?

Because a radiologist armed with the data insight and accuracy of AI could be a formidable force in patient care.

文章來源BBC侵權(quán)刪。