Development and external validation of a machine learning-based model to classify uric acid stones in patients with kidney stones of Hounsfield units <800
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The correct diagnosis of uric acid (UA) stones has important clinical implications since patients with a high risk of perioperative morbidity may be spared surgical intervention and be offered alkalization therapy. We developed and validated a machine learning (ML)-based model to identify UA stones from non-UA stones. An international, multicenter study was performed on 202 patients who received percutaneous nephrolithotomy for kidney stones with HU < 800. Data from 156 (77.2%) patients were used for model development, while data from 46 (22.8%) patients from a multinational institution were used for external validation. A total of 21,074 kidney and stone contour-annotated computed tomography images were trained with the ResNet-18 Mask R-convolutional neural network algorithm. Finally, this model was concatenated with demographic and clinical data as a fully-connected layer for stone classification. Our model was 100% sensitive in detecting kidney stones in each patient, and the delineation of kidney and stone contours was precise within clinically acceptable ranges. The development model provided an accuracy of 99.9%, with 100.0% sensitivity and 98.9% specificity, in distinguishing UA from non-UA stones. On external validation, the model performed with an accuracy of 97.1%, with 89.4% sensitivity and 98.6% specificity. SHAP plots revealed stone density, diabetes mellitus, and urinary pH as the most important features for classification. Our ML-based model accurately identified and delineated kidney stones and classified UA stones from non-UA stones with the highest predictive accuracy reported to date. Our model can be reliably used to select candidates for an earlier-directed alkalization therapy.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".