MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3171841570 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1005999/v1

Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Diagnosis Based on Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Using Deep Learning Techniques

2021· preprint· en· W3171841570 on OpenAlexaff
Danial Sharifrazi, Roohallah Alizadehsani, Navid Hoseini Izadi, Mohamad Roshanzamir, Afshin Shoeibi, Fahime Khozeimeh, Fariba Alizadeh Sani, Zahra Alizadeh Sani, Sadiq Hussain, Chandrashekhar Harlapur, J. M. Górriz, Abbas Khosravi, Saeid Nahavandi, Nizal Sarrafzadegan, Sheikh Mohammed Shariful Islam

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypertrophic cardiomyopathyArtificial intelligenceConvolutional neural networkDeep learningMagnetic resonance imagingComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Cardiac magnetic resonanceMedicineRadiologyCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) can lead to serious cardiac problems. HCM is often diagnosed by an expert using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) images obtained from patients. In this research, we aimed to develop a deep learning technique to automate HCM diagnosis. CMR images of 37421 healthy and 21846 HCM patients were obtained during two years. Images obtained from female patients form 53% of the collected dataset. The mean and standard deviation of the dataset patients’ age are 48.2 and 19.5 years, respectively. Three experts inspected images and determined whether a case has HCM or not. New data augmentation was used to generate new images by employing color filtering on the existing ones. To classify the augmented images, we used a deep convolutional neural network (CNN). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time CNN is used for HCM diagnosis. We designed our CNN from scratch to reach acceptable diagnosis accuracy. Comparing the designed algorithm output with the experts’ opinions, the method could achieve accuracy of 95.23%, recall of 97.90%, and specificity of 93.06% on the original dataset. The same performance metrics for the designed algorithm on the augmented dataset were 98.53%, 98.70%, and 95.21%, respectively. We have also experimented with different optimizers (e.g. Adadelta and Adagrad) and other data augmentation methods (e.g. height shift and rotation) to further evaluate the proposed method. Using our data augmentation method, accuracy of 98.53% were achieved which is higher than the best accuracy (95.83%) obtained by the other data augmentation methods which have been evaluated. The upper bound on difference between true error rate and empirical error rate of the proposed method has also been provided in order to present better performance analysis. The advantages of employing the proposed method are elimination of contrast agent and its complications, decreased CMR examination time, lower costs for patients and cardiac imaging centers.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.734
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicCardiomyopathy and Myosin StudiesFrench-language works237,207