MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283375416 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0269323

Using deep-learning in fetal ultrasound analysis for diagnosis of cystic hygroma in the first trimester

2022· article· en· W4283375416 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mark Walker, Inbal Willner, Olivier Miguel, Malia S. Q. Murphy, Darine El‐Chaâr, Felipe Moretti, Alysha L. J. Dingwall‐Harvey, Ruth Rennicks White, Katherine A. Muldoon, André Carrington, Steven Hawken, Richard I. Aviv

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFetal and Pediatric Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooOttawa HospitalChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
FundersInstitute of Human Development, Child and Youth HealthCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineUltrasoundCystic hygromaReceiver operating characteristicFetal headRadiologyPregnancyFetusInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To develop and internally validate a deep-learning algorithm from fetal ultrasound images for the diagnosis of cystic hygromas in the first trimester. METHODS: All first trimester ultrasound scans with a diagnosis of a cystic hygroma between 11 and 14 weeks gestation at our tertiary care centre in Ontario, Canada were studied. Ultrasound scans with normal nuchal translucency were used as controls. The dataset was partitioned with 75% of images used for model training and 25% used for model validation. Images were analyzed using a DenseNet model and the accuracy of the trained model to correctly identify cases of cystic hygroma was assessed by calculating sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Gradient class activation heat maps (Grad-CAM) were generated to assess model interpretability. RESULTS: The dataset included 289 sagittal fetal ultrasound images;129 cystic hygroma cases and 160 normal NT controls. Overall model accuracy was 93% (95% CI: 88-98%), sensitivity 92% (95% CI: 79-100%), specificity 94% (95% CI: 91-96%), and the area under the ROC curve 0.94 (95% CI: 0.89-1.0). Grad-CAM heat maps demonstrated that the model predictions were driven primarily by the fetal posterior cervical area. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that deep-learning algorithms can achieve high accuracy in diagnostic interpretation of cystic hygroma in the first trimester, validated against expert clinical assessment.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations28
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicFetal and Pediatric Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207