MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390540312 · doi:10.1002/jmri.29211

Deep Learning Algorithm of the <scp>SPARCC</scp> Scoring System in <scp>SI</scp> Joint <scp>MRI</scp>

2024· article· en· W4390540312 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yingying Lin, Peng Cao, Shirley Chiu Wai Chan, Kam Ho Lee, Vince Wing Hang Lau, Ho Yin Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Hong Kong
KeywordsSacroiliitisAxial spondyloarthritisIntraclass correlationAlgorithmMedicineArtificial intelligencePearson product-moment correlation coefficientNuclear medicineMachine learningMagnetic resonance imagingRadiologyComputer scienceMathematicsReproducibilityStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) scoring system is a sacroiliitis grading system. PURPOSE: To develop a deep learning-based pipeline for grading sacroiliitis using the SPARCC scoring system. STUDY TYPE: Prospective. POPULATION: The study included 389 participants (42.2-year-old, 44.6% female, 317/35/37 for training/validation/testing). A pretrained algorithm was used to differentiate image with/without sacroiliitis. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3-T, short tau inversion recovery (STIR) sequence, fast spine echo. ASSESSMENT: The regions of interest as ground truth for models' training were identified by a rheumatologist (HYC, 10-year-experience) and a radiologist (KHL, 6-year-experience) using the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society definition of MRI sacroiliitis independently. Another radiologist (YYL, 4.5-year-experience) solved the discrepancies. The bone marrow edema (BME) and sacroiliac region models were for segmentation. Frangi-filter detected vessels used as intense reference. Deep learning pipeline scored using SPARCC scoring system evaluating presence and features of BMEs. A rheumatologist (SCWC, 6-year-experience) and a radiologist (VWHL, 14-year-experience) scored using the SPARCC scoring system once. The radiologist (YYL) scored twice with 5-day interval. STATISTICAL TESTS: Independent samples t-tests and Chi-squared tests were used. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Pearson coefficient evaluated consistency between readers and the deep learning pipeline. We evaluated the performance using sensitivity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and Dice coefficient. A P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The ICC and the Pearson coefficient between the SPARCC scores from three readers and the deep learning pipeline were 0.83 and 0.86, respectively. The sensitivity in identifying BME and accuracy of identifying SI joints and blood vessels was 0.83, 0.90, and 0.88, respectively. The dice coefficients were 0.82 (sacrum) and 0.80 (ilium). DATA CONCLUSION: The high consistency with human readers indicated that deep learning pipeline may provide a SPARCC-informed deep learning approach for scoring of STIR images in spondyloarthritis. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Magnetic Resonance ImagingSame topicSpondyloarthritis Studies and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207