ArticleProceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering
Automation of ischemic myocardial scar detection in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging of the left ventricle using machine learning.
Article in Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: Machine learning techniques can be applied to cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) scans in order to differentiate patients with and without ischemic myocardial scarring (IMS). However, processing the image data in the CMR scans requires manual work that takes a significant amount of time and expertise. We propose to develop and test an AI method to automatically identify IMS in CMR scans to streamline processing and reduce time costs. Materials and Methods: CMR scans from 170 patients (138 IMS & 32 without IMS as identified by a clinical expert) were processed using a multistep automatic image data selection algorithm. This algorithm consisted of cropping, circle detection, and supervised machine learning to isolate focused left ventricle image data. We used a ResNet-50 convolutional neural network to evaluate manual vs. automatic selection of left ventricle image data through calculating accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, F1 score, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Results: The algorithm accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, F1 score, and AUROC were 80.6%, 85.6%, 73.7%, 83.0%, and 0.837, respectively, when identifying IMS using manually selected left ventricle image data. With automatic selection of left ventricle image data, the same parameters were 78.5%, 86.0%, 70.7%, 79.7%, and 0.848, respectively. Conclusion: Our proposed automatic image data selection algorithm provides a promising alternative to manual selection when there are time and expertise limitations. Automatic image data selection may also prove to be an important and necessary step toward integration of machine learning diagnosis and prognosis in clinical workflows.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.