MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3167653560 · doi:10.1002/mp.15033

Detecting lumbar lesions in <sup>99m</sup>Tc‐MDP SPECT by deep learning: Comparison with physicians

2021· article· en· W3167653560 on OpenAlexaff
Yoann Petibon, Frederic H. Fahey, Xinhua Cao, Zakhar Levin, Briana Sexton‐Stallone, Anthony E. Falone, Katherine Zukotynski, Neha Kwatra, Ruth Lim, Zvi Bar‐Sever, Yanis Chemli, S. Ted Treves, Georges El Fakhri, Jinsong Ouyang

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersPartners Healthcare
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkLumbarNuclear medicineLesionMedicineReceiver operating characteristicDeep learningMedical imagingArtificial intelligenceSingle-photon emission computed tomographyRadiologyEmission computed tomographyComputer sciencePositron emission tomographyPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose 99mTc‐MDP single‐photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) is an established tool for diagnosing lumbar stress, a common cause of low back pain (LBP) in pediatric patients. However, detection of small stress lesions is complicated by the low quality of SPECT, leading to significant interreader variability. The study objectives were to develop an approach based on a deep convolutional neural network (CNN) for detecting lumbar lesions in 99mTc‐MDP scans and to compare its performance to that of physicians in a localization receiver operating characteristic (LROC) study. Methods Sixty‐five lesion‐absent (LA) 99mTc‐MDP studies performed in pediatric patients for evaluating LBP were retrospectively identified. Projections for an artificial focal lesion were acquired separately by imaging a 99mTc capillary tube at multiple distances from the collimator. An approach was developed to automatically insert lesions into LA scans to obtain realistic lesion‐present (LP) 99mTc‐MDP images while ensuring knowledge of the ground truth. A deep CNN was trained using 2.5D views extracted in LP and LA 99mTc‐MDP image sets. During testing, the CNN was applied in a sliding‐window fashion to compute a 3D “heatmap” reporting the probability of a lesion being present at each lumbar location. The algorithm was evaluated using cross‐validation on a 99mTc‐MDP test dataset which was also studied by five physicians in a LROC study. LP images in the test set were obtained by incorporating lesions at sites selected by a physician based on clinical likelihood of injury in this population. Results The deep learning (DL) system slightly outperformed human observers, achieving an area under the LROC curve (AUCLROC) of 0.830 (95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.758, 0.924]) compared with 0.785 (95% CI: [0.738, 0.830]) for physicians. The AUCLROC for the DL system was higher than that of two readers (difference in AUCLROC [ΔAUCLROC] = 0.049 and 0.053) who participated to the study and slightly lower than that of two other readers (ΔAUCLROC = −0.006 and −0.012). Another reader outperformed DL by a more substantial margin (ΔAUCLROC = −0.053). Conclusion The DL system provides comparable or superior performance than physicians in localizing small 99mTc‐MDP positive lumbar lesions.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207