Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35670006›Full record

ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2022

Prediction of the composition of urinary stones using deep learning.

Ui Seok Kim, Hyo Sang Kwon, Wonjong Yang, Wonchul Lee, Changil Choi, Jong Keun Kim, Seong Ho Lee, Dohyoung Rim, Jun Hyun Han

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative and clinical urology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

9 authors.

Ui Seok KimDepartment of Urology, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hwaseong, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-4060-0265
Hyo Sang KwonDepartment of Urology, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hwaseong, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-0254-9841
Wonjong YangDepartment of Urology, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hwaseong, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-6007-902X
Wonchul LeeDepartment of Urology, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hwaseong, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-7585-7485
Changil ChoiDepartment of Urology, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hwaseong, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-6488-1933
Jong Keun KimDepartment of Urology, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hwaseong, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-6507-2628
Seong Ho LeeDepartment of Urology, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hwaseong, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-3142-2233
Dohyoung RimDepartment of Cognitive Science, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-2022-6333
Jun Hyun HanDepartment of Urology, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hwaseong, Korea. junuro@naver.com.ORCID 0000-0002-8452-1916

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aimed to predict the composition of urolithiasis using deep learning from urinary stone images. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe classified 1,332 stones into 31 classes according to the stone composition. The top 4 classes with a frequency of 110 or more (class 1: calcium oxalate monohydrate [COM] 100%, class 2: COM 80%+struvite 20%, class 3: COM 60%+calcium oxalate dihydrate [COD] 40%, class 4: uric acid 100%) were selected. With the 965 stone images of the top 4 classes, we used the seven convolutional neural networks (CNN) to classify urinary stones and compared their classification performances.

resultsAmong the seven models, Xception_Ir0.001 showed the highest accuracy, precision, and recall and was selected as the CNN model to predict the stone composition. The sensitivity and specificity for the 4 classes by Xception_Ir0.001 were as follows: class 1 (94.24%, 91.73%), class 2 (85.42%, 96.14%), class 3 (86.86%, 99.59%), and class 4 (94.96%, 98.82%). The sensitivity and specificity of the individual components of the stones were as follows. COM (98.82%, 94.96%), COD (86.86%, 99.64%), struvite (85.42%, 95.59%), and uric acid (94.96%, 98.82%). The area under the curves for class 1, 2, 3, and 4 were 0.98, 0.97, 1.00, and 1.00, respectively.

conclusionsThis study showed the feasibility of deep learning for the diagnostic ability to assess urinary stone composition from images. It can be an alternative tool for conventional stone analysis and provide decision support to urologists, improving the effectiveness of diagnosis and treatment.

Indexed as

Deep LearningUrinary CalculiUrolithiasisCalcium OxalateHumansStruviteUric AcidCalcium OxalateStruviteUric AcidArtificial intelligenceDeep learningEndoscopyMachine learningUrolithiasis

Identifiers

PMID35670006
PMCPMC9262483

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.