MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388676639 · doi:10.1109/jtehm.2023.3332618

Applying Machine Learning and Point-Set Registration to Automatically Measure the Severity of Spinal Curvature on Radiographs

2023· article· en· W4388676639 on OpenAlexafffund
Jason Wong, Marek Reformat, Edmond Lou

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Translational Engineering in Health and Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaStollery Children’s Hospital FoundationChildren's Hospital FoundationUniversity of AlbertaWomen and Children's Health Research InstituteChildren's Health Research Institute
KeywordsRadiographyArtificial intelligenceMeasure (data warehouse)Computer scienceCurvatureSet (abstract data type)Point (geometry)Image registrationComputer visionPattern recognition (psychology)MedicineMathematicsRadiologyData miningGeometryImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Measuring the severity of the lateral spinal curvature, or Cobb angle, is critical for monitoring and making treatment decisions for children with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). However, manual measurement is time-consuming and subject to human error. Therefore, clinicians seek an automated measurement method to streamline workflow and improve accuracy. This paper reports on a novel machine learning algorithm of cascaded convolutional neural networks (CNN) to measure the Cobb angle on spinal radiographs automatically. METHODS: The developed method consisted of spinal column segmentation using a CNN, vertebra localization and segmentation using iterative vertebra body location coupled with another CNN, point-set registration to correct vertebra segmentations, and Cobb angle measurement using the final segmentations. Measurement performance was evaluated with the circular mean absolute error (CMAE) and percentage within clinical acceptance ([Formula: see text]) between automatic and manual measurements. Analysis was separated by curve severity to identify any potential systematic biases using independent samples Student's t-tests. RESULTS: The method detected 346 of the 352 manually measured Cobb angles (98%), with a CMAE of 2.8° and 91% of measurements within the 5° clinical acceptance. No statistically significant differences were found between the CMAEs of mild ([Formula: see text]), moderate (25°-45°), and severe ([Formula: see text]) groups. The average measurement time per radiograph was 17.7±10.2s, improving upon the estimated average of 30s it takes an experienced rater to measure. Additionally, the algorithm outputs segmentations with the measurement, allowing clinicians to interpret measurement results. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: The developed method measured Cobb angles on radiographs automatically with high accuracy, quick measurement time, and interpretability, suggesting clinical feasibility.

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)0.004
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Translational Engineering in Health and MedicineSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207