Prospective Real-Time Validation of a Lung Ultrasound Deep Learning Model in the ICU
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accuracy of a bedside, real-time deployment of a deep learning (DL) model capable of distinguishing between normal (A line pattern) and abnormal (B line pattern) lung parenchyma on lung ultrasound (LUS) in critically ill patients. DESIGN: Prospective, observational study evaluating the performance of a previously trained LUS DL model. Enrolled patients received a LUS examination with simultaneous DL model predictions using a portable device. Clip-level model predictions were analyzed and compared with blinded expert review for A versus B line pattern. Four prediction thresholding approaches were applied to maximize model sensitivity and specificity at bedside. SETTING: Academic ICU. PATIENTS: One-hundred critically ill patients admitted to ICU, receiving oxygen therapy, and eligible for respiratory imaging were included. Patients who were unstable or could not undergo an LUS examination were excluded. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 100 unique ICU patients (400 clips) were enrolled from two tertiary-care sites. Fifty-six patients were mechanically ventilated. When compared with gold standard expert annotation, the real-time inference yielded an accuracy of 95%, sensitivity of 93%, and specificity of 96% for identification of the B line pattern. Varying prediction thresholds showed that real-time modification of sensitivity and specificity according to clinical priorities is possible. CONCLUSIONS: A previously validated DL classification model performs equally well in real-time at the bedside when platformed on a portable device. As the first study to test the feasibility and performance of a DL classification model for LUS in a dedicated ICU environment, our results justify further inquiry into the impact of employing real-time automation of medical imaging into the care of the critically ill.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".