MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035151116 · doi:10.1148/ryai.2020200048

Automated Quantification of CT Patterns Associated with COVID-19 from Chest CT

2020· article· en· W3035151116 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiology Artificial Intelligence · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 diagnosis using AI
Canadian institutionsVancouver General Hospital
FundersAstraZenecaUniversidad de NavarraNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteSunovionHouston Methodist Research InstituteGlaxoSmithKlineCOPD Foundation
KeywordsGround-glass opacityCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Ground truthMedicineLungOpacityCorrelationRadiologyPearson product-moment correlation coefficientNuclear medicineSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)LobeArtificial intelligencePathologyInternal medicineMathematicsComputer scienceStatisticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose To present a method that automatically segments and quantifies abnormal CT patterns commonly present in COVID-19, namely ground-glass opacities and consolidations. Materials and Methods In this retrospective study, the proposed method takes as input a noncontrast chest CT and segments the lesions, lungs, and lobes in three dimensions, based on a dataset of 9749 chest CT volumes. The method outputs two combined measures of the severity of lung and lobe involvement, quantifying both the extent of COVID-19 abnormalities and presence of high opacities, based on deep learning and deep reinforcement learning. The first measure of (percentage of opacity, percentage of high opacity [PO, PHO]) is global, while the second of (lung severity score, lung high opacity score [LSS, LHOS]) is lobe-wise. Evaluation of the algorithm is reported on CT studies of 200 participants (100 COVID-19 confirmed patients and 100 healthy controls) from institutions from Canada, Europe, and the United States collected between 2002 and April 2020. Ground truth is established by manual annotations of lesions, lungs, and lobes. Correlation and regression analyses were performed to compare the prediction to the ground truth. Results Pearson correlation coefficient between method prediction and ground truth for COVID-19 cases was calculated as 0.92 for PO (P < .001), 0.97 for PHO (P < .001), 0.91 for LSS (P < .001), and 0.90 for LHOS (P < .001). Ninety-eight of 100 healthy controls had a predicted PO of less than 1%; two had between 1% and 2%. Automated processing time to compute the severity scores was 10 seconds per case compared with 30 minutes required for manual annotations. Conclusion A new method segments regions of CT abnormalities associated with COVID-19 and computes (PO, PHO), as well as (LSS, LHOS) severity scores. Keywords: CT, Lung, Segmentation/Vision/Application Domain, Quantification/Vision/Application Domain, Supervised Learning, Reinforcement Learning © RSNA, 2021 Supplemental material is available for this article.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.444
Threshold uncertainty score0.906

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.244 · 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