MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2553706653

AUTOMATED BONE CONTOUR DETECTION IN 3D B-MODE ULTRASOUND IMAGES USING OPTIMISED PHASE SYMMETRY FEATURES-A CLINICAL EVALUATION FOR PELVIC FRACTURES

2012· article· en· W2553706653 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ilker Hacihaliloglu, Rafeef Abugharbieh, Antony J. Hodgson, P. Gug

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionSpeckle noiseUltrasoundComputer scienceFilter (signal processing)Orientation (vector space)Speckle patternGold standard (test)RadiologyMedicineMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to its ease of use, portability, low cost, real-time response and absence of ionising radiation, ultrasound (US) imaging could potentially be an important tool for non-invasive diagnostic imaging in orthopaedics. Unfortunately, nonlinear characteristics of ultrasound, low signal-to-noise ratio and speckle make it difficult to accurately and reliably determine the location and shape of the bone surface. Recently, local phase-based image processing methods, named phase symmetry (PS), have been shown to perform very well at locating bone surfaces in ultrasound images, with reported accuracies of better than 0.4mm. The local phase features are extracted by filtering the B-mode US image in the frequency domain with a Log-Gabor filter. Although successful results were achieved, accurate localization is highly affected by the choice of filter parameters. Recently, our group proposed a method of automatically selecting the scale, bandwidth and orientation parameters of Log-Gabor filters. Previously, we showed our first clinical results using local phase information to identify distal radius fractures from B-mode US images using automatically selected filter parameters. The objective of the current study was to determine if the proposed automatic parameter selection method could produce accurate pelvic bone surface shapes in a live clinical setting. CT scans were obtained as part of normal clinical care from ten patients admitted to Vancouver General Hospital for pelvic fractures. A ‘gold standard’ bone surface was computed from the CT scan. After obtaining informed consent, we performed an additional US scan using a commercially-available real-time scanner (Voluson 730, GE Healthcare, Waukesha, WI) with a 3D US transducer. The PS bone surfaces were extracted from the US scans using the empirical Log-Gabor filter parameters and optimised Log-Gabor filter parameters. The bone surfaces on CT were extracted using a standard thresholding approach that minimises the intra-class variance. The US images were then registered to the CT images using a feature-based rigid registration algorithm with manual landmarking. The quality of the resulting surface matching was evaluated by computing the root mean square distance between the two surface representations. The average fiducial registration error was 0.31mm (SD 0.25mm). The average surface fitting error (SFE) was 0.72mm (SD 1.24 mm) for PS surfaces extracted using empirical filter parameters and 0.41mm (SD 0.44 mm) using the optimized filter parameters. In this study, we have demonstrated that our automatic filter parameter selection process can be applied successfully to a bone surface extraction task on 3D US images acquired under clinically realistic conditions. The accuracy of the resulting bone surface is excellent, with an average discrepancy relative to a CT standard of well under a millimeter. This level of accuracy is likely to be sufficiently good for a number of important surgical tasks, including CT to US registration.

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)0.004
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.504
Teacher spread0.421 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBone health and osteoporosis research→French-language works237,207→