Machine learning for accurate estimation of fetal gestational age based on ultrasound images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate estimation of gestational age is an essential component of good obstetric care and informs clinical decision-making throughout pregnancy. As the date of the last menstrual period is often unknown or uncertain, ultrasound measurement of fetal size is currently the best method for estimating gestational age. The calculation assumes an average fetal size at each gestational age. The method is accurate in the first trimester, but less so in the second and third trimesters as growth deviates from the average and variation in fetal size increases. Consequently, fetal ultrasound late in pregnancy has a wide margin of error of at least ±2 weeks' gestation. Here, we utilise state-of-the-art machine learning methods to estimate gestational age using only image analysis of standard ultrasound planes, without any measurement information. The machine learning model is based on ultrasound images from two independent datasets: one for training and internal validation, and another for external validation. During validation, the model was blinded to the ground truth of gestational age (based on a reliable last menstrual period date and confirmatory first-trimester fetal crown rump length). We show that this approach compensates for increases in size variation and is even accurate in cases of intrauterine growth restriction. Our best machine-learning based model estimates gestational age with a mean absolute error of 3.0 (95% CI, 2.9-3.2) and 4.3 (95% CI, 4.1-4.5) days in the second and third trimesters, respectively, which outperforms current ultrasound-based clinical biometry at these gestational ages. Our method for dating the pregnancy in the second and third trimesters is, therefore, more accurate than published methods.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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".