MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Using machine learning to automatically measure kyphotic and lordotic angle measurements on radiographs for children with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

2024· article· en· W4400110524 on OpenAlexafffund
Jason Wong, Marek Reformat, Éric Parent, Edmond Lou

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Engineering & Physics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaStollery Children’s Hospital FoundationAlberta InnovatesWomen and Children's Health Research Institute
KeywordsIdiopathic scoliosisScoliosisRadiographyMeasure (data warehouse)MedicineKyphosisOrthodonticsMedical physicsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceRadiologySurgeryData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Measuring the kyphotic angle (KA) and lordotic angle (LA) on lateral radiographs is important to truly diagnose children with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. However, it is a time-consuming process to measure the KA because the endplate of the upper thoracic vertebra is normally difficult to identify. To save time and improve measurement accuracy, a machine learning algorithm was developed to automatically extract the KA and LA. The accuracy and reliability of the T1-T12 KA, T5-T12 KA, and L1-L5 LA were reported. A convolutional neural network was trained using 100 radiographs with data augmentation to segment the T1-L5 vertebrae. Sixty radiographs were used to test the method. Accuracy and reliability were reported using the percentage of measurements within clinical acceptance (≤9°), standard error of measurement (SEM), and inter-method intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC2,1). The automatic method detected 95 % (57/60), 100 %, and 100 % for T1-T12 KA, T5-T12 KA, and L1-L5 LA, respectively. The clinical acceptance rate, SEM, and ICC2,1 for T1-T12 KA, T5-T12 KA, and L1-L5 LA were (98 %, 0.80°, 0.91), (75 %, 4.08°, 0.60), and (97 %, 1.38°, 0.88), respectively. The automatic method measured quickly with an average of 4 ± 2 s per radiograph and illustrated how measurements were made on the image, allowing verifications by clinicians.

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)0.007
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Engineering & PhysicsSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207