Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34198044›Full record

ArticleComputers in biology and medicine2021

Machine learning-based analysis of operator pupillary response to assess cognitive workload in clinical ultrasound imaging.

Harshita Sharma, Lior Drukker, Aris T Papageorghiou, J Alison Noble

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Computers in biology and medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The Use of Machine Learning in Eye Tracking Studies in Medical Imaging: A Review.IEEE journal of biomedical and health informatics · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Applications of artificial intelligence in obstetrics.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 2023
    Article
  9. Skill, or Style? Classification of Fetal Sonography Eye-Tracking Data.Proceedings of machine learning research · 2023
    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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Harshita SharmaInstitute of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom. Electronic address: harshita.sharma@eng.ox.ac.uk.
Lior DrukkerNuffield Department of Women's and Reproductive Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Aris T PapageorghiouNuffield Department of Women's and Reproductive Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
J Alison NobleInstitute of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
University of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPupillometry, the measurement of eye pupil diameter, is a well-established and objective modality correlated with cognitive workload. In this paper, we analyse the pupillary response of ultrasound imaging operators to assess their cognitive workload, captured while they undertake routine fetal ultrasound examinations. Our experiments and analysis are performed on real-world datasets obtained using remote eye-tracking under natural clinical environmental conditions.

methodsOur analysis pipeline involves careful temporal sequence (time-series) extraction by retrospectively matching the pupil diameter data with tasks captured in the corresponding ultrasound scan video in a multi-modal data acquisition setup. This is followed by the pupil diameter pre-processing and the calculation of pupillary response sequences. Exploratory statistical analysis of the operator pupillary responses and comparisons of the distributions between ultrasonographic tasks (fetal heart versus fetal brain) and operator expertise (newly-qualified versus experienced operators) are performed. Machine learning is explored to automatically classify the temporal sequences into the corresponding ultrasonographic tasks and operator experience using temporal, spectral, and time-frequency features with classical (shallow) models, and convolutional neural networks as deep learning models.

resultsPreliminary statistical analysis of the extracted pupillary response shows a significant variation for different ultrasonographic tasks and operator expertise, suggesting different extents of cognitive workload in each case, as measured by pupillometry. The best-performing machine learning models achieve receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area under curve (AUC) values of 0.98 and 0.80, for ultrasonographic task classification and operator experience classification, respectively.

conclusionWe conclude that we can successfully assess cognitive workload from pupil diameter changes measured while ultrasound operators perform routine scans. The machine learning allows the discrimination of the undertaken ultrasonographic tasks and scanning expertise using the pupillary response sequences as an index of the operators' cognitive workload. A high cognitive workload can reduce operator efficiency and constrain their decision-making, hence, the ability to objectively assess cognitive workload is a first step towards understanding these effects on operator performance in biomedical applications such as medical imaging.

Indexed as

Machine LearningWorkloadCognitionRetrospective StudiesUltrasonographyCognitive workloadConvolutional neural networkDeep learningEye-trackingFetal ultrasoundMachine learningMulti-modal dataPupillometrySonography data scienceTime-series analysisUltrasound imaging

Identifiers

PMID34198044
PMCPMC8404042
OpenAlexW3177321240

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.