MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313562246 · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-27350-0

Automatic segmentation of trabecular and cortical compartments in HR-pQCT images using an embedding-predicting U-Net and morphological post-processing

2023· article· en· W4313562246 on OpenAlexafffund
Nathan J. Neeteson, Bryce A. Besler, Danielle E. Whittier, Steven K. Boyd

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsAlberta Bone and Joint Health InstituteUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchArthritis SocietyUniversity of CalgaryAlberta Student Aid
KeywordsEmbeddingSegmentationComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceAnatomyNeurosciencePattern recognition (psychology)Biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract High-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT) is an emerging in vivo imaging modality for quantification of bone microarchitecture. However, extraction of quantitative microarchitectural parameters from HR-pQCT images requires an accurate segmentation of the image. The current standard protocol using semi-automated contouring for HR-pQCT image segmentation is laborious, introduces inter-operator biases into research data, and poses a barrier to streamlined clinical implementation. In this work, we propose and validate a fully automated algorithm for segmentation of HR-pQCT radius and tibia images. A multi-slice 2D U-Net produces initial segmentation predictions, which are post-processed via a sequence of traditional morphological image filters. The U-Net was trained on a large dataset containing 1822 images from 896 unique participants. Predicted segmentations were compared to reference segmentations on a disjoint dataset containing 386 images from 190 unique participants, and 156 pairs of repeated images were used to compare the precision of the novel and current protocols. The agreement of morphological parameters obtained using the predicted segmentation relative to the reference standard was excellent (R 2 between 0.938 and > 0.999). Precision was significantly improved for several outputs, most notably cortical porosity. This novel and robust algorithm for automated segmentation will increase the feasibility of using HR-pQCT in research and clinical settings.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.830
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.330 · 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.

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

Citations27
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207