MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415904774 · doi:10.1002/ail2.70012

Automated <scp>AI</scp> ‐Based Lung Disease Classification Using Point‐of‐Care Ultrasound

2025· article· en· W4415904774 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied AI Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSwedish Foundation for International Cooperation in Research and Higher EducationMakerere UniversityInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsWorkflowPreprocessorLung diseaseLung ultrasoundLungUltrasoundInference

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Timely and accurate diagnosis of lung diseases is critical for reducing related morbidity and mortality. Lung ultrasound (LUS) has emerged as a useful point‐of‐care tool for evaluating various lung conditions. However, interpreting LUS images remains challenging due to operator‐dependent variability, low image quality, and limited availability of experts in many regions. In this study, we present a lightweight and efficient deep learning model, ParSE‐CNN, alongside fine‐tuned versions of VGG‐16, InceptionV3, Xception, and Vision Transformer architectures, to classify LUS images into three categories: COVID‐19, other lung pathology, and healthy lung. Models were trained using data from public sources and Ugandan healthcare facilities, and evaluated on a held‐out Ugandan dataset. Fine‐tuned VGG‐16 achieved the highest classification performance with 98% accuracy, 97% precision, 98% recall, and a 97% F1‐score. ParSE‐CNN yielded a competitive accuracy of 95%, precision of 94%, recall of 95%, and F1‐score of 97% while offering a 58.3% faster inference time (0.006 s vs. 0.014 s) and a lower parameter count (5.18 M vs. 10.30 M) than VGG‐16. To enhance input quality, we developed a preprocessing pipeline, and to improve interpretability, we employed Grad‐CAM heatmaps, which showed high alignment with radiologically relevant features. Finally, ParSE‐CNN was integrated into a mobile LUS workflow with a PC backend, enabling real‐time AI‐assisted diagnosis at the point of care in low‐resource settings.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.796
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.314 · 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