Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34453662›Full record

ArticleMedical & biological engineering & computing2021

A proof of concept study for machine learning application to stenosis detection.

Gareth Jones, Jim Parr, Perumal Nithiarasu, Sanjay Pant

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Gareth JonesFaculty of Science and Engineering, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.
Jim ParrMcLaren Technology Centre, Woking, UK.
Perumal NithiarasuFaculty of Science and Engineering, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.
Sanjay PantFaculty of Science and Engineering, Swansea University, Swansea, UK. Sanjay.Pant@swansea.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2081-308X

Funding

Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council EP/N509553/1Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council EP/R010811/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This proof of concept (PoC) assesses the ability of machine learning (ML) classifiers to predict the presence of a stenosis in a three vessel arterial system consisting of the abdominal aorta bifurcating into the two common iliacs. A virtual patient database (VPD) is created using one-dimensional pulse wave propagation model of haemodynamics. Four different machine learning (ML) methods are used to train and test a series of classifiers-both binary and multiclass-to distinguish between healthy and unhealthy virtual patients (VPs) using different combinations of pressure and flow-rate measurements. It is found that the ML classifiers achieve specificities larger than 80% and sensitivities ranging from 50 to 75%. The most balanced classifier also achieves an area under the receiver operative characteristic curve of 0.75, outperforming approximately 20 methods used in clinical practice, and thus placing the method as moderately accurate. Other important observations from this study are that (i) few measurements can provide similar classification accuracies compared to the case when more/all the measurements are used; (ii) some measurements are more informative than others for classification; and (iii) a modification of standard methods can result in detection of not only the presence of stenosis, but also the stenosed vessel. Graphical Abstract An overview of methodology fo the creation of virtual patients and their classification.

Indexed as

Diagnostic ImagingMachine LearningConstriction, PathologicHumansProof of Concept StudyArterial disease diagnosisMachine learningPulse wave haemodynamicsVirtual patient database

Identifiers

PMID34453662
PMCPMC8440304

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.