MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999205267 · doi:10.3389/fped.2020.00001

Using Deep Learning Algorithms to Grade Hydronephrosis Severity: Toward a Clinical Adjunct

2020· article· en· W2999205267 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pediatrics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Urology and Nephrology Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster Children's HospitalVector InstituteMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHydronephrosisAlgorithmUltrasoundGrading (engineering)Clinical PracticeConvolutional neural networkArtificial intelligenceRadiologyMachine learningInternal medicineMathematicsComputer scienceUrinary systemPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grading hydronephrosis severity relies on subjective interpretation of renal ultrasound images. Deep learning algorithms classify images into categories using data-driven methods, thus presenting a promising option for grading hydronephrosis. The current study explored the potential of convolutional neural networks (CNN), a type of deep learning algorithm, to grade hydronephrosis ultrasound images according to the 5-point Society for Fetal Urology (SFU) classification system, and discusses its potential applications in developing decision and teaching aids for clinical practice. We developed a five-layer CNN to grade 2420 sagittal hydronephrosis ultrasound images (191 SFU 0 [8%], 407 SFU I [17%], 666 SFU II [28%], 833 SFU III [34%], and 323 SFU IV [13%]), from 673 patients ranging from 0 to 116.29 months old (Mage=16.53, SD=17.80). Five-way (all grades) and two-way classification problems (i.e. II vs. III, and low [0-II] vs. high [III-IV]) were explored. The CNN classified 94% (95% CI, 93%-95%) of the images correctly or within one grade of the provided label in the five-way classification problem. 51% of these images (95% CI, 49%-53%) were correctly predicted, with an average weighted F1 score of 0.49 (95% CI, 0.47-0.51). The CNN achieved an average accuracy of 78% (95% CI, 75%-82%) with an average weighted F1 of 0.78 (95% CI, 0.74-0.82) when classifying low vs. high grades, and an average accuracy of 71% (95% CI, 68%-74%) with an average weighted F1 score of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.68-0.75) when discriminating between grades II vs. III. Our model performs well above chance level, and classifies almost all images either correctly or within one grade of the provided label. We have demonstrated the applicability of a CNN approach to hydronephrosis ultrasound image classification, and further investigation into a deep learning-based clinical adjunct for hydronephrosis is warranted.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.258 · 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