A deep learning model for detection of cervical spinal cord compression in MRI scans
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) evidence of spinal cord compression plays a central role in the diagnosis of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM). There is growing recognition that deep learning models may assist in addressing the increasing volume of medical imaging data and provide initial interpretation of images gathered in a primary-care setting. We aimed to develop and validate a deep learning model for detection of cervical spinal cord compression in MRI scans. Patients undergoing surgery for DCM as a part of the AO Spine CSM-NA or CSM-I prospective cohort studies were included in our study. Patients were divided into a training/validation or holdout dataset. Images were labelled by two specialist physicians. We trained a deep convolutional neural network using images from the training/validation dataset and assessed model performance on the holdout dataset. The training/validation cohort included 201 patients with 6588 images and the holdout dataset included 88 patients with 2991 images. On the holdout dataset the deep learning model achieved an overall AUC of 0.94, sensitivity of 0.88, specificity of 0.89, and f1-score of 0.82. This model could improve the efficiency and objectivity of the interpretation of cervical spine MRI scans.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it