Study protocol and design for the assessment of paediatric pneumonia from X-ray images using deep learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction In low-income and middle-income countries, pneumonia remains the leading cause of illness and death in children<5 years. The recommended tool for diagnosing paediatric pneumonia is the interpretation of chest X-ray images, which is difficult to standardise and requires trained clinicians/radiologists. Current automated computational tools have primarily focused on assessing adult pneumonia and were trained on images evaluated by a single specialist. We aim to provide a computational tool using a deep-learning approach to diagnose paediatric pneumonia using X-ray images assessed by multiple specialists trained by the WHO expert X-ray image reading panel. Methods and analysis Approximately 10 000 paediatric chest X-ray images are currently being collected from an ongoing WHO-supported surveillance study in Bangladesh. Each image will be read by two trained clinicians/radiologists for the presence or absence of primary endpoint pneumonia (PEP) in each lung, as defined by the WHO. Images whose PEP labels are discordant in either lung will be reviewed by a third specialist and the final assignment will be made using a majority vote. Convolutional neural networks will be used for lung segmentation to align and scale the images to a reference, and for interpretation of the images for the presence of PEP. The model will be evaluated against an independently collected and labelled set of images from the WHO. The study outcome will be an automated method for the interpretation of chest radiographs for diagnosing paediatric pneumonia. Ethics and dissemination All study protocols were approved by the Ethical Review Committees of the Bangladesh Institute of Child Health, Bangladesh. The study sponsor deemed it unnecessary to attain ethical approval from the Academic and Clinical Central Office for Research and Development of University of Edinburgh, UK. The study uses existing X-ray images from an ongoing WHO-coordinated surveillance. All findings will be published in an open-access journal. All X-ray labels and statistical code will be made openly available. The model and images will be made available on request.
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 | 0.031 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.097 | 0.026 |
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".