MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3132566415 · doi:10.1117/12.2582016

Development of an open-source system for prostate biopsy training in Senegal

2021· article· en· W3132566415 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine O. Wu, Babacar Diao, Tamás Ungi, Alireza Sedghi, Ron Kikinis, Parvin Mousavi, Gábor Fichtinger

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProstate biopsyProstateComputer scienceOpen sourceMedicineMedical physicsInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer diagnosed in men. The rate is disproportionately high among men in sub-Saharan Africa where, unlike in North America and Western Europe, the screening process for prostate cancer has historically not been routine. Currently, as awareness regarding prostate health increases, more patients in this region are being referred to trans-rectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy, a diagnosis procedure which requires a strong understanding of prostate zonal anatomy. To aid in the instruction of this procedure, prostate biopsy training programs need to be implemented. Unfortunately, current TRUS-guided training tools are not ideal for reproducibility in these Western African countries. To answer this challenge, we are developing an affordable and open-source training simulator for TRUS-guided prostate biopsy, for use in Senegal. In this paper, we present the implementation of the training simulator’s virtual interface, highlighting the generation and evaluation of the critical training component of zonal anatomy overlaid on TRUS. METHODS: For the simulator’s dataset, we registered TRUS and MRI volumes together to obtain the zonal segmentation from the MRI volumes. After generating ten pairings of TRUS overlaid with zonal segmentation, we designed and implemented a virtual TRUS training system, developed in open-source software. The objective of our simulator is to teach trainees to accurately identify the prostate’s anatomical zones in TRUS. To confirm the system’s usability for training zonal identification, we conducted a two-part survey on the quality of the zonal overlays with 7 urology experts. In the first part, they assessed the zonal overlay for visual correctness by rating 10 images from one patient’s TRUS with registered overlay on a 5-point Likert scale. For the second part, they labelled 10 plain TRUS volumes with zonal anatomy and the labels were compared to the labels of our overlay. RESULTS: On average, experts rated the zonal overlay’s visual accuracy at 4 out of 5. Furthermore, 7 out of 7 experts labelled the peripheral, anterior, and transitional zones in the same regions we overlaid them, and 5 out of 7 labelled the central zone in the same region we overlaid it. CONCLUSION: We created the prototype of a TRUS imaging simulator in open-source software. A vital training component, zonal overlay, was generated using publicly accessible data and validated by expert urologists for prostate zone identification, confirming the concept.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.006

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 head0.253
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.191 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education→French-language works237,207→