Optimization of Doppler velocity echocardiographic measurements using an automatic contour detection method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intra- and inter-observer variability in Doppler velocity echocardiographic measurements (DVEM) is a significant issue. Indeed, imprecisions of DVEM can lead to diagnostic errors, particularly in the quantification of the severity of heart valve dysfunction. To minimize the variability and rapidity of DVEM, we have developed an automatic method of Doppler velocity wave contour detection, based on active contour models. To validate our new method, results obtained with this method were compared to those obtained manually by an experienced echocardiographer on Doppler echocardiographic images of left ventricular outflow tract and transvalvular flow velocity signals recorded in 30 patients, 15 with aortic stenosis and 15 with mitral stenosis. We focused on three essential variables that are measured routinely by Doppler echocardiography in the clinical setting: the maximum velocity, the mean velocity and the velocity-time integral. Comparison between the two methods has shown a very good agreement (linear correlation coefficient R(2) = 0.99 between the automatically and the manually extracted variables). Moreover, the computation time was really short, about 5s. This new method applied to DVEM could, therefore, provide a useful tool to eliminate the intra- and inter-observer variabilities associated with DVEM and thereby to improve the diagnosis of cardiovascular disease. This automatic method could also allow the echocardiographer to realize these measurements within a much shorter period of time compared to standard manual tracing method. From a practical point of view, the model developed can be easily implanted in a standard echocardiographic system.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".