MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149128484 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2008.2006025

Knee X-Ray Image Analysis Method for Automated Detection of Osteoarthritis

2008· article· en· W2149128484 on OpenAlexaff
Lior Shamir, S.M. Ling, William W. Scott, Ângelo José Gonçalves Bós, Nikita Orlov, Tomasz Macura, D. Mark Eckley, Luigi Ferrucci, I. Goldberg

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraditional Chinese Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsOsteoarthritisPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceRadiographyComputer scienceClassifier (UML)Contextual image classificationk-nearest neighbors algorithmTest setImage (mathematics)MathematicsMedicineRadiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a method for automated detection of radiographic osteoarthritis (OA) in knee X-ray images. The detection is based on the Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) classification grades, which correspond to the different stages of OA severity. The classifier was built using manually classified X-rays, representing the first four KL grades (normal, doubtful, minimal, and moderate). Image analysis is performed by first identifying a set of image content descriptors and image transforms that are informative for the detection of OA in the X-rays and assigning weights to these image features using Fisher scores. Then, a simple weighted nearest neighbor rule is used in order to predict the KL grade to which a given test X-ray sample belongs. The dataset used in the experiment contained 350 X-ray images classified manually by their KL grades. Experimental results show that moderate OA (KL grade 3) and minimal OA (KL grade 2) can be differentiated from normal cases with accuracy of 91.5% and 80.4%, respectively. Doubtful OA (KL grade 1) was detected automatically with a much lower accuracy of 57%. The source code developed and used in this study is available for free download at www.openmicroscopy.org.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations228
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicTraditional Chinese Medicine StudiesFrench-language works237,207