MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Identification of Myofascial Trigger Point Using the Combination of Texture Analysis in B-mode Ultrasound with Machine Learning Classifiers

2023· preprint· en· W4388572797 on OpenAlexaff
Fatemeh Shomal Zadeh, Ryan G. L. Koh, Banu Dilek, Kei Masani, Dinesh Kumbhare

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMyofascial pain diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMyofascial pain syndromePattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceLocal binary patternsComputer scienceSupport vector machineHistogramMedicineImage (mathematics)Pathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Myofascial Pain Syndrome (MPS) is a prevalent chronic pain disorder characterized by myofascial trigger points (MTrPs). Current diagnosis relies on manual detection of MTrPs, which has low inter-rater reliability. This study aims to enhance diagnosis through machine learning (ML) and a combination of texture-features extracted from B-mode ultrasound (B-mode-US) images. Four texture-features were investigated: statistical-features, and their combination with Gabor, local binary (LBP), and SEGL, LBP + gray-level-co-occurrence-matrices + Edge for the classification of MTrPs on the B-mode-US images. B-mode-US images of trapezius muscles (n=90) were examined for MTrPs and healthy muscle. Three methods of LBP, SEGL, and Gabor were separately calculated for each B-mode-US image. Then, the statistical-features (e.g., entropy) were calculated over the B-mode-US images and those three methods. Seven Machine learning (ML) classifiers (e.g., neural network) with the calculated statistical-features were applied to discriminate MTrPs from healthy muscle. Additionally, traditional statistical analysis (i.e., ANOVA) was calculated between statistical-features within each method. The results indicated that the combination of statistical-features effectively discriminated between MTrPs and healthy muscles, based on traditional statistical analysis. However, ML classifiers struggled due to high variation and similar mean values among them. This discrepancy between them prompts further exploration of US texture-based automated ML for MTrPs diagnosis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicMyofascial pain diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207