Myocardial Perfusion SPECT Imaging Radiomic Features and Machine Learning Algorithms for Cardiac Contractile Pattern Recognition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A U-shaped contraction pattern was shown to be associated with a better Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) response. The main goal of this study is to automatically recognize left ventricular contractile patterns using machine learning algorithms trained on conventional quantitative features (ConQuaFea) and radiomic features extracted from Gated single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (GSPECT MPI). Among 98 patients with standard resting GSPECT MPI included in this study, 29 received CRT therapy and 69 did not (also had CRT inclusion criteria but did not receive treatment yet at the time of data collection, or refused treatment). A total of 69 non-CRT patients were employed for training, and the 29 were employed for testing. The models were built utilizing features from three distinct feature sets (ConQuaFea, radiomics, and ConQuaFea + radiomics (combined)), which were chosen using Recursive feature elimination (RFE) feature selection (FS), and then trained using seven different machine learning (ML) classifiers. In addition, CRT outcome prediction was assessed by different treatment inclusion criteria as the study's final phase. The MLP classifier had the highest performance among ConQuaFea models (AUC, SEN, SPE = 0.80, 0.85, 0.76). RF achieved the best performance in terms of AUC, SEN, and SPE with values of 0.65, 0.62, and 0.68, respectively, among radiomic models. GB and RF approaches achieved the best AUC, SEN, and SPE values of 0.78, 0.92, and 0.63 and 0.74, 0.93, and 0.56, respectively, among the combined models. A promising outcome was obtained when using radiomic and ConQuaFea from GSPECT MPI to detect left ventricular contractile patterns by machine learning.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".