MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2622594191 · doi:10.1121/1.4987977

Breast ultrasound elastography using inverse finite element elasticity reconstruction

2017· article· en· W2622594191 on OpenAlexaff
Abbas Samani, Seyed Reza Mousavi, Hassan Rivaz, Ali Sadeghi‐Naini, Gregory J. Czarnota

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook HospitalConcordia UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElastographyBreast cancerFinite element methodImaging phantomUltrasound elastographyIterative reconstructionMedicineUltrasoundComputer scienceRadiologyCancerPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide. Its early detection is paramount for its successful treatment outcome. Among imaging techniques developed for breast cancer diagnosis, elastography has shown good promise. In this presentation, a breast ultrasound elastography method will be described, and its application in breast cancer patients will be demonstrated. The method follows the quasi-static elastography approach where the breast is stimulated using regular ultrasound transducer. RF data are utilized within a dynamic programming minimization algorithm for tissue motion tracking, leading to 2D (axial + lateral) strain field. This field is processed within a novel inverse finite-element reconstruction framework to reconstruct the breast Young's modulus distribution. The framework uses Hooke's law to obtain the Young's modulus distribution. It is iterative where the stress distribution is updated using finite element method at the end of each reconstruction iteration. To ensure convergence, the Young's modulus was averaged within 5x5 finite element windows. A phantom study mimicking breast cancer was performed to validate the developed system which demonstrated high (93%) accuracy of Young's modulus reconstruction. The method was then applied to breast cancer patients where elastography images reconstructed using the proposed method showed its effectiveness in clinical setting. The only hardware required in the system is an ultrasound scanner. As such, it is a promising candidate for clinical cancer diagnosis.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207