MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation of UNeXt for Automatic Bone Surface Segmentation on Ultrasound Imaging in Image-Guided Pediatric Surgery

2025· article· en· W4414419288 on OpenAlexaff
Jasper M. van der Zee, Aimon Rahman, Kevin Klein Gunnewiek, Marijn A. J. Hiep, Matthijs Fitski, Ilker Hacihaliloglu, Ahmed Z. Alsinan, Vishal M. Patel, Annemieke S. Littooij, Alida F. W. van der Steeg

Bibliographic record

VenueBioengineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSegmentationPelvisUltrasoundThorax (insect anatomy)Image segmentation3D ultrasoundDice

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automatic bone surface segmentation represents an advanced alternative for conventional patient registration methods in surgical navigation technologies. In pediatrics, such technologies require tailored approaches to ensure optimal performance-specifically in patients under the age of ten, whose immature bones have less distinct bone characteristics. In this study, we developed a segmentation model tailored for pediatric patients. We captured 4309 ultrasound images from the bones in the extremities, pelvis and thorax of 16 pediatric patients. The dataset was manually annotated by a technical physician and sample-wise validated by a pediatric radiologist. A UNeXt deep learning model was trained for automatic segmentation. The segmentation performance was evaluated using the mean centerline Dice score and the mean surface distance. A mean centerline Dice score of 0.85 (SD: 0.13) and a mean surface distance of 0.78 mm (SD: 1.15 mm) were achieved. No important differences in performance were observed for patients younger than the age of ten compared to older patients. Our results demonstrate that the segmentation model detects the bone surface with sufficient accuracy, enabling precise and effective patient registration. The model performs sufficiently across different pediatric age groups, making it a viable tool for integration into ultrasound-based patient registration in image-guided pediatric surgery.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 venueBioengineeringSame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207