MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2593454076 · doi:10.1117/12.2252641

Identification and tracking of vertebrae in ultrasound using deep networks with unsupervised feature learning

2017· article· en· W2593454076 on OpenAlexafffund
Jorden Hetherington, Mehran Pesteie, Victoria A. Lessoway, Purang Abolmaesumi, Robert Rohling

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMedical Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsB.C. Women's Hospital & Health CentreUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceIdentification (biology)Computer scienceTracking (education)Feature (linguistics)Deep learningFeature extractionUnsupervised learningPattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionPsychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Percutaneous needle insertion procedures on the spine often require proper identification of the vertebral level in order to effectively deliver anesthetics and analgesic agents to achieve adequate block. For example, in obstetric epidurals, the target is at the L3-L4 intervertebral space. The current clinical method involves “blind” identification of the vertebral level through manual palpation of the spine, which has only 30% accuracy. This implies the need for better anatomical identification prior to needle insertion. A system is proposed to identify the vertebrae, assigning them to their respective levels, and track them in a standard sequence of ultrasound images, when imaged in the paramedian plane. Machine learning techniques are developed to identify discriminative features of the laminae. In particular, a deep network is trained to automatically learn the anatomical features of the lamina peaks, and classify image patches, for pixel-level classification. The chosen network utilizes multiple connected auto-encoders to learn the anatomy. Pre-processing with ultrasound bone enhancement techniques is done to aid the pixel-level classification performance. Once the lamina are identified, vertebrae are assigned levels and tracked in sequential frames. Experimental results were evaluated against an expert sonographer. Based on data acquired from 15 subjects, vertebrae identification with sensitivity of 95% and precision of 95% was achieved within each frame. Between pairs of subsequently analyzed frames, matches of predicted vertebral level labels were correct in 94% of cases, when compared to matches of manually selected labels

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicMedical Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207