MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409688964 · doi:10.3389/frai.2025.1560523

Deep learning for accurate B-line detection and localization in lung ultrasound imaging

2025· article· en· W4409688964 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nixson Okila, Andrew Katumba, Joyce Nakatumba‐Nabende, Cosmas Mwikirize, Sudi Murindanyi, Jonathan Serugunda, Samuel Bugeza, Anthony Oriekot, Juliet Bossa, Eva Nabawanuka

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Artificial Intelligence · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsUltrasoundLine (geometry)Ultrasound imagingDeep learningLungLung ultrasoundRadiologyArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMedicineInternal medicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Lung ultrasound (LUS) has become an essential imaging modality for assessing various pulmonary conditions, including the presence of B-line artifacts. These artifacts are commonly associated with conditions such as increased extravascular lung water, decompensated heart failure, dialysis-related chronic kidney disease, interstitial lung disease, and COVID-19 pneumonia. Accurate detection of the B-line in LUS images is crucial for effective diagnosis and treatment. However, interpreting LUS is often subject to observer variability, requiring significant expertise and posing challenges in resource-limited settings with few trained professionals. Methods: To address these limitations, deep learning models have been developed for automated B-line detection and localization. This study introduces YOLOv5-PBB and YOLOv8-PBB, two modified models based on YOLOv5 and YOLOv8, respectively, designed for precise and interpretable B-line localization using polygonal bounding boxes (PBBs). YOLOv5-PBB was enhanced by modifying the detection head, loss function, non-maximum suppression, and data loader to enable PBB localization. YOLOv8-PBB was customized to convert segmentation masks into polygonal representations, displaying only boundaries while removing the masks. Additionally, an image preprocessing technique was incorporated into the models to enhance LUS image quality. The models were trained on a diverse dataset from a publicly available repository and Ugandan health facilities. Results: Experimental results showed that YOLOv8-PBB achieved the highest precision (0.947), recall (0.926), and mean average precision (0.957). YOLOv5-PBB, while slightly lower in performance (precision: 0.931, recall: 0.918, mAP: 0.936), had advantages in model size (14 MB vs. 21 MB) and average inference time (33.1 ms vs. 47.7 ms), making it more suitable for real-time applications in low-resource settings. Discussion: The integration of these models into a mobile LUS screening tool provides a promising solution for B-line localization in resource-limited settings, where accessibility to trained professionals may be scarce. The YOLOv5-PBB and YOLOv8-PBB models offer high performance while addressing challenges related to inference speed and model size, making them ideal candidates for mobile deployment in such environments.

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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Artificial IntelligenceSame topicUltrasound in Clinical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207