Pain Detection in Masked Faces during Procedural Sedation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pain monitoring is essential to the quality of care for patients undergoing a medical procedure with sedation. An automated mechanism for detecting pain could improve sedation dose titration. Previous studies on facial pain detection have shown the viability of computer vision methods in detecting pain in unoccluded faces. However, the faces of patients undergoing procedures are often partially occluded by medical devices and face masks. A previous preliminary study on pain detection on artificially occluded faces has shown a feasible approach to detect pain from a narrow band around the eyes. This study has collected video data from masked faces of 14 patients undergoing procedures in an interventional radiology department and has trained a deep learning model using this dataset. The model was able to detect expressions of pain accurately and, after causal temporal smoothing, achieved an average precision (AP) of 0.72 and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AVC) of 0.82. These results outperform baseline models and show viability of computer vision approaches for pain detection of masked faces during procedural sedation. Cross-dataset performance is also examined when a model is trained on a publicly available dataset and tested on the sedation videos. The ways in which pain expressions differ in the two datasets are qualitatively examined.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".