Automatic Spine Ultrasound Segmentation for Scoliosis Visualization and Measurement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Integrate tracked ultrasound and AI methods to provide a safer and more accessible alternative to X-ray for scoliosis measurement. We propose automatic ultrasound segmentation for 3-dimensional spine visualization and scoliosis measurement to address difficulties in using ultrasound for spine imaging. METHODS: We trained a convolutional neural network for spine segmentation on ultrasound scans using data from eight healthy adult volunteers. We tested the trained network on eight pediatric patients. We evaluated image segmentation and 3-dimensional volume reconstruction for scoliosis measurement. RESULTS: As expected, fuzzy segmentation metrics reduced when trained networks were translated from healthy volunteers to patients. Recall decreased from 0.72 to 0.64 (8.2% decrease), and precision from 0.31 to 0.27 (3.7% decrease). However, after finding optimal thresholds for prediction maps, binary segmentation metrics performed better on patient data. Recall decreased from 0.98 to 0.97 (1.6% decrease), and precision from 0.10 to 0.06 (4.5% decrease). Segmentation prediction maps were reconstructed to 3-dimensional volumes and scoliosis was measured in all patients. Measurement in these reconstructions took less than 1 minute and had a maximum error of 2.2° compared to X-ray. CONCLUSION: automatic spine segmentation makes scoliosis measurement both efficient and accurate in tracked ultrasound scans. SIGNIFICANCE: Automatic segmentation may overcome the limitations of tracked ultrasound that so far prevented its use as an alternative of X-ray in scoliosis measurement.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".