Deep learning derived automated <scp>ASPECTS</scp> on non‐contrast <scp>CT</scp> scans of acute ischemic stroke patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ischemic stroke is the most common type of stroke, ranked as the second leading cause of death worldwide. The Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) is considered as a systematic method of assessing ischemic change on non-contrast CT scans (NCCT) of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients, while still suffering from the requirement of experts' experience and also the inconsistent results between readers. In this study, we proposed an automated ASPECTS method to utilize the powerful learning ability of neural networks for objectively scoring CT scans of AIS patients. First, we proposed to use the CT perfusion (CTP) from one-stop stroke imaging to provide the golden standard of ischemic regions for ASPECTS scoring. Second, we designed an asymmetry network to capture features when comparing the left and right sides for each ASPECTS region to estimate its ischemic status. Third, we performed experiments in a large main dataset of 870 patients, as well as an independent testing dataset consisting of 207 patients with radiologists' scorings. Experimental results show that our network achieved remarkable performance, as sensitivity and accuracy of 93.7 and 92.4% in the main dataset, and 95.5 and 91.3% in the independent testing dataset, respectively. In the latter dataset, our analysis revealed a high positive correlation between the ASPECTS score and the prognosis of patients in 90DmRs. Also, we found ASPECTS score is a good indicator of the size of CTP core volume of an infraction. The proposed method shows its potential for automated ASPECTS scoring on NCCT images.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".