Deep Learning Model for Predicting Neurodevelopmental Outcome in Very Preterm Infants Using Cerebral Ultrasound
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To develop deep learning (DL) models applied to neonatal cranial ultrasound (CUS) and clinical variables to predict neurodevelopmental impairment (NDI) in very preterm infants (VPIs) at 3 years of corrected age. Patients and Methods: weeks' gestation) born between 2004 and 2016 in Nova Scotia, Canada. Clinical data at hospital discharge and CUS images at 3 time points were used to develop DL models using elastic net (EN) and convolutional neural network (CNN). The models' performances were compared using precision recall area under the curve (PR-AUC) and area under the receiver operation characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) with their 95% ci. Results: Of 665 eligible VPIs, 619 (93%) infants with 4184 CUS images were included. The CNN model combining CUS and clinical variables reported better performance (PR-AUC, 0.75; 95% CI, 072-0.79; ROC-AUC, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.67-0.74) in the prediction of positive NDI outcome compared with the traditional models based solely on clinical predictors (PR-AUC, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.52-0.68; ROC-AUC, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.68-0.75). When analyzed by the CUS plane and acquisition time point, the model using the anterior coronal plane at 6 weeks of age provided the highest predictive accuracy (PR-AUC, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.77-0.91; ROC-AUC, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66-0.87). Conclusion: We developed and internally validated a DL prognostic model using CUS and clinical predictors to predict NDI in VPIs at 3 years of age. Early and accurate identification of infants at risk for NDI enables referral to targeted interventions, which improves functional outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".