Incidental cerebral aneurysms detected by a computer-assisted detection system based on artificial intelligence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: Computer-assisted detection (CAD) systems based on artificial intelligence (AI) using convolutional neural network (CNN) have been successfully used for the diagnosis of unruptured cerebral aneurysms in experimental situations. However, it is yet unclear whether CAD systems can detect cerebral aneurysms effectively in real-life clinical situations. This paper describes the diagnostic efficacy of CAD systems for cerebral aneurysms and the types of cerebral aneurysms that they can detect. PATIENT CONCERNS: From March 7, 2017 to August 26, 2018 we performed brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans for 1623 subjects, to rule out intracranial diseases. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records including the history and images for each patient. DIAGNOSES, INTERVENTIONS AND OUTCOMES: Among them, we encountered 5 cases in whom the cerebral aneurysms had been overlooked in the first and second round of imaging, and were detected for the first time by CAD. All missed aneurysms were less than 2 mm in diameter. Of the 5 aneurysms, 2 were internal carotid artery (ICA) paraclinoid aneurysms, 2 were Internal carotid-posterior communicating artery (IC-PC) aneurysms and 1 was a distal middle cerebral artery (MCA) aneurysm. LESSONS: Our CAD system can detect very small aneurysms masked by the surrounding arteries and difficult for radiologists to detect. In the future, CAD systems might pave the way to substitute the workload of diagnostic radiologists and reduce the cost of human labor.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".