MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3174925807 · doi:10.3233/shti210444

Validation of a novel handheld 3D ultrasound system for imaging scoliosis – phantom study

2021· book-chapter· en· W3174925807 on OpenAlexaffabout
Edmond Lou, Duc V. Nguyen, Douglas L. Hill, Jim Raso

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in health technology and informatics · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImaging phantomScoliosisSagittal planeScanner3D ultrasoundSoftwareComputer scienceUltrasoundComputer visionCobb angleArtificial intelligenceBiomedical engineeringMedicineNuclear medicineRadiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Use of 3D ultrasound (US) scanners to detect and monitor scoliosis have been validated. The Cobb angle, axial vertebral rotation, spinal flexibility, curvatures in the sagittal profile and the Cobb angle on the plane of maximum curvature (PMC) can be measured from coronal, transverse and sagittal planes of ultrasound images. However, traditional 3D ultrasound scanners are relatively bulky and expensive. 2D US handheld and low-cost scanners are widely available. To adapt the 2D scanners for scoliosis applications, a position and orientation system is integrated with the scanner. The objective of this study was to validate a newly developed 3D handheld US system to image the spine. The wireless handheld US scanner (C3-HD, Clarius, Canada) was selected because of its high resolution and availability of raw data. A wireless tracking system based on electromagnetic (G4 system, Polhemus, USA) was integrated with the Clarius ultrasound. During scanning, the ultrasound information was synchronized with the scanner's position and orientation by using custom developed software. Both information were streamed wirelessly to a laptop. Custom software reconstructed and displayed the 3D spinal image in real-time. A single 3D printed vertebra, two full plastic spine phantoms from T1-T12 vertebrae and a non-scoliotic volunteer were scanned. The 3D reconstruction process of a spine image was less than 3 seconds. The dimensional and the angle errors were 1 mm and 3°, respectively. This study demonstrated that a low-cost ($11,000 USD) handheld 3D ultrasound system was developed and validated. Clinical trials on subjects attending will be the next step.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.302 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in health technology and informatics→Same topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment→French-language works237,207→