MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391305160 · doi:10.1186/s12938-024-01210-6

Protocol for metadata and image collection at diabetic foot ulcer clinics: enabling research in wound analytics and deep learning

2024· article· en· W4391305160 on OpenAlexafffund
Reza Basiri, Karim Manji, Philip M. LeLievre, John M. Toole, Faith Kim, Shehroz S. Khan, Miloš R. Popović

Bibliographic record

VenueBioMedical Engineering OnLine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of CalgaryToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity Health Network FoundationAlberta Health Services
KeywordsAnalyticsMetadataDeep learningArtificial intelligenceMedicineProtocol (science)Computer scienceSegmentationMachine learningPopulationDiabetic foot ulcerJaccard indexDiabetic footCluster analysisData miningDiabetes mellitus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The escalating impact of diabetes and its complications, including diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs), presents global challenges in quality of life, economics, and resources, affecting around half a billion people. DFU healing is hindered by hyperglycemia-related issues and diverse diabetes-related physiological changes, necessitating ongoing personalized care. Artificial intelligence and clinical research strive to address these challenges by facilitating early detection and efficient treatments despite resource constraints. This study establishes a standardized framework for DFU data collection, introducing a dedicated case report form, a comprehensive dataset named Zivot with patient population clinical feature breakdowns and a baseline for DFU detection using this dataset and a UNet architecture. RESULTS: Following this protocol, we created the Zivot dataset consisting of 269 patients with active DFUs, and about 3700 RGB images and corresponding thermal and depth maps for the DFUs. The effectiveness of collecting a consistent and clean dataset was demonstrated using a bounding box prediction deep learning network that was constructed with EfficientNet as the feature extractor and UNet architecture. The network was trained on the Zivot dataset, and the evaluation metrics showed promising values of 0.79 and 0.86 for F1-score and mAP segmentation metrics. CONCLUSIONS: This work and the Zivot database offer a foundation for further exploration of holistic and multimodal approaches to DFU research.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0980.047

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations43
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioMedical Engineering OnLineSame topicDiabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207