Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35726505›Full record

ArticleUltrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology2022

Clinical workflow of sonographers performing fetal anomaly ultrasound scans: deep-learning-based analysis.

L Drukker, H Sharma, J N Karim, R Droste, J A Noble, A T Papageorghiou

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
11.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Zoom Pattern Signatures for Fetal Ultrasound Structures.Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention : MICCAI ... International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

L DrukkerNuffield Department of Women's and Reproductive Health, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5588-1410
H SharmaInstitute of Biomedical Engineering, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4683-2606
J N KarimNuffield Department of Women's and Reproductive Health, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1199-6283
R DrosteInstitute of Biomedical Engineering, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8030-3321
J A NobleInstitute of Biomedical Engineering, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3060-3772
A T PapageorghiouNuffield Department of Women's and Reproductive Health, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8143-2232
University of Oxford · GBJohn Radcliffe Hospital · GBTel Aviv University · IL

Funding

Department of HealthEuropean Research Council ERC-ADG-2015 694581
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveDespite decades of obstetric scanning, the field of sonographer workflow remains largely unexplored. In the second trimester, sonographers use scan guidelines to guide their acquisition of standard planes and structures; however, the scan-acquisition order is not prescribed. Using deep-learning-based video analysis, the aim of this study was to develop a deeper understanding of the clinical workflow undertaken by sonographers during second-trimester anomaly scans.

methodsWe collected prospectively full-length video recordings of routine second-trimester anomaly scans. Important scan events in the videos were identified by detecting automatically image freeze and image/clip save. The video immediately preceding and following the important event was extracted and labeled as one of 11 commonly acquired anatomical structures. We developed and used a purposely trained and tested deep-learning annotation model to label automatically the large number of scan events. Thus, anomaly scans were partitioned as a sequence of anatomical planes or fetal structures obtained over time.

resultsA total of 496 anomaly scans performed by 14 sonographers were available for analysis. UK guidelines specify that an image or videoclip of five different anatomical regions must be stored and these were detected in the majority of scans: head/brain was detected in 97.2% of scans, coronal face view (nose/lips) in 86.1%, abdomen in 93.1%, spine in 95.0% and femur in 92.3%. Analyzing the clinical workflow, we observed that sonographers were most likely to begin their scan by capturing the head/brain (in 24.4% of scans), spine (in 23.2%) or thorax/heart (in 22.8%). The most commonly identified two-structure transitions were: placenta/amniotic fluid to maternal anatomy, occurring in 44.5% of scans; head/brain to coronal face (nose/lips) in 42.7%; abdomen to thorax/heart in 26.1%; and three-dimensional/four-dimensional face to sagittal face (profile) in 23.7%. Transitions between three or more consecutive structures in sequence were uncommon (up to 13% of scans). None of the captured anomaly scans shared an entirely identical sequence.

conclusionsWe present a novel evaluation of the anomaly scan acquisition process using a deep-learning-based analysis of ultrasound video. We note wide variation in the number and sequence of structures obtained during routine second-trimester anomaly scans. Overall, each anomaly scan was found to be unique in its scanning sequence, suggesting that sonographers take advantage of the fetal position and acquire the standard planes according to their visibility rather than following a strict acquisition order. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Indexed as

Deep LearningFemaleFetusHumansPregnancyPregnancy Trimester, SecondUltrasonography, PrenatalWorkflowanatomyartificial intelligenceautomationbig dataclinical workflowcomputer visiondata sciencedeep learningimage analysismachine learningneural networkobstetricspregnancyscreeningsonographyultrasound

Identifiers

PMID35726505
PMCPMC10107110
OpenAlexW4283217943

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.