ArticleJournal of medical systems2017
Extreme Learning Machine Framework for Risk Stratification of Fatty Liver Disease Using Ultrasound Tissue Characterization.
Article in Journal of medical systems, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 64 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
64 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 127 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deep learning in image forgery: A systematic review for risk of bias (RoB).Journal of forensic sciences · 2026Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence models for imaging detection of hepatic steatosis through systematic review and meta analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Image-based AI diagnostic performance for fatty liver: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical imaging · 2023Pooled it
- Application of artificial intelligence in chronic liver diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC gastroenterology · 2021Pooled it
- A simple clinical model for predicting multiple liver histologic injuries in obese individuals undergoing bariatric surgery.Hepatology international · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence and personalised medicine in liver cancer.Journal of hepatology · 2026Review
- Diagnosis and grading of steatotic liver disease via clinical and laboratory data using machine learning.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Advancements in artificial intelligence applications for liver ultrasound imaging.BJR artificial intelligence · 2026Review
- AI in Adipose Imaging: Revolutionizing Visceral Adipose Tissue, Ectopic Fat, and Cardiovascular Risk Assessment.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2025Review
- Classification of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Grades using Pre-Trained Convolutional Neural Networks and a Random Forest Classifier on B-Mode Ultrasound Images.Journal of biomedical physics & engineering · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence-based Approaches for Characterizing Plaque Components From Intravascular Optical Coherence Tomography Imaging: Integration Into Clinical Decision Support Systems.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- FPA-based weighted average ensemble of deep learning models for classification of lung cancer using CT scan images.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Liver biopsy in the modern era: from traditional techniques to artificial intelligence and multi-omics integration.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence in imaging for liver disease diagnosis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Liver Diseases: Recent Advances.Advances in therapy · 2024Review
- Radiological Diagnosis of Chronic Liver Disease and Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Review.Journal of medical systems · 2023Review
- Bio-Inspired Network for Diagnosing Liver Steatosis in Ultrasound Images.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Artificial intelligence-aided ultrasound in renal diseases: a systematic review.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Review
- Role of Ensemble Deep Learning for Brain Tumor Classification in Multiple Magnetic Resonance Imaging Sequence Data.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
4 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fatty Liver Disease (FLD) is caused by the deposition of fat in liver cells and leads to deadly diseases such as liver cancer. Several FLD detection and characterization systems using machine learning (ML) based on Support Vector Machines (SVM) have been applied. These ML systems utilize large number of ultrasonic grayscale features, pooling strategy for selecting the best features and several combinations of training/testing. As result, they are computationally intensive, slow and do not guarantee high performance due to mismatch between grayscale features and classifier type. This study proposes a reliable and fast Extreme Learning Machine (ELM)-based tissue characterization system (a class of Symtosis) for risk stratification of ultrasound liver images. ELM is used to train single layer feed forward neural network (SLFFNN). The input-to-hidden layer weights are randomly generated reducing computational cost. The only weights to be trained are hidden-to-output layer which is done in a single pass (without any iteration) making ELM faster than conventional ML methods. Adapting four types of K-fold cross-validation (K = 2, 3, 5 and 10) protocols on three kinds of data sizes: S0-original, S4-four splits, S8-sixty four splits (a total of 12 cases) and 46 types of grayscale features, we stratify the FLD US images using ELM and benchmark against SVM. Using the US liver database of 63 patients (27 normal/36 abnormal), our results demonstrate superior performance of ELM compared to SVM, for all cross-validation protocols (K2, K3, K5 and K10) and all types of US data sets (S0, S4, and S8) in terms of sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and area under the curve (AUC). Using the K10 cross-validation protocol on S8 data set, ELM showed an accuracy of 96.75% compared to 89.01% for SVM, and correspondingly, the AUC: 0.97 and 0.91, respectively. Further experiments also showed the mean reliability of 99% for ELM classifier, along with the mean speed improvement of 40% using ELM against SVM. We validated the symtosis system using two class biometric facial public data demonstrating an accuracy of 100%.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.