Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33742067›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Automatic lumen detection and magnetic alignment control for magnetic-assisted capsule colonoscope system optimization.

Sheng-Yang Yen, Hao-En Huang, Gi-Shih Lien, Chih-Wen Liu, Chia-Feng Chu, Wei-Ming Huang, Fat-Moon Suk

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05213741 (Feasibility Trial of Magnetic-assisted Colonoscope Platform), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05213741 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Feasibility Trial of Magnetic-assisted Colonoscope Platform

TypeinterventionalSponsorTaipei Medical University WanFang HospitalRan2024 to 2024Enrolled10ConditionsColonoscopy, Colorectal CancerArmsAutonomous navigation of a magnetic colonoscope
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Robotic Autonomy for Magnetic Endoscope Biopsy.IEEE transactions on medical robotics and bionics · 2022
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Sheng-Yang Yen *Department of Electrical Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Hao-En Huang *Department of Electrical Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Gi-Shih LienDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Taipei Municipal Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, No. 111, Section 3, Xing Long Road, Taipei, 116, Taiwan.
Chih-Wen LiuDepartment of Electrical Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Chia-Feng ChuDepartment of Electrical Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Wei-Ming HuangDepartment of Electrical Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Fat-Moon SukDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Taipei Municipal Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, No. 111, Section 3, Xing Long Road, Taipei, 116, Taiwan. fmsuk@tmu.edu.tw.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We developed a magnetic-assisted capsule colonoscope system with integration of computer vision-based object detection and an alignment control scheme. Two convolutional neural network models A and B for lumen identification were trained on an endoscopic dataset of 9080 images. In the lumen alignment experiment, models C and D used a simulated dataset of 8414 images. The models were evaluated using validation indexes for recall (R), precision (P), mean average precision (mAP), and F1 score. Predictive performance was evaluated with the area under the P-R curve. Adjustments of pitch and yaw angles and alignment control time were analyzed in the alignment experiment. Model D had the best predictive performance. Its R, P, mAP, and F1 score were 0.964, 0.961, 0.961, and 0.963, respectively, when the area of overlap/area of union was at 0.3. In the lumen alignment experiment, the mean degrees of adjustment for yaw and pitch in 160 trials were 21.70° and 13.78°, respectively. Mean alignment control time was 0.902 s. Finally, we compared the cecal intubation time between semi-automated and manual navigation in 20 trials. The average cecal intubation time of manual navigation and semi-automated navigation were 9 min 28.41 s and 7 min 23.61 s, respectively. The automatic lumen detection model, which was trained using a deep learning algorithm, demonstrated high performance in each validation index.

Indexed as

AutomationCecumColonoscopesColonoscopyDiagnosis, Computer-AssistedEquipment DesignHumansMagnetic PhenomenaSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID33742067
PMCPMC7979719

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.