Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36303574›Full record

ArticleProceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering

Efficient Quality Control with Mixed CT and CTA Datasets.

Lucas W Remedios, Leon Y Cai, Colin B Hansen, Samuel W Remedios, Bennett A Landman

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 96% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lucas W RemediosDepartment of Computer Science, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Leon Y CaiDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Colin B HansenDepartment of Computer Science, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Samuel W RemediosDepartment of Computer Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Bennett A LandmanDepartment of Computer Science, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Vanderbilt University · USJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY CTSA FOR PEDIATRIC RESEARCHUL1RR024975 · NCRR · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI BERNARD, GORDON RAPHAEL · 2007 to 2011
$45.7M
The Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research (VICTR)UL1TR000445 · NCATS · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI BERNARD, GORDON RAPHAEL · 2012 to 2016
$41.4M
MEDICAL SCIENTIST TRAINING PROGRAMT32GM007347 · NIGMS · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI WILLIAMS, CHRISTOPHER S. · 1985 to 2023
$26.3M
Medical Scientist Training ProgramT32GM152284 · NIGMS · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI Christopher S. Williams · 2024 to 2026
$4.8M
The INSIGHT-ICU Study: Illuminating Neuropsychological dysfunction and Systemic Inflammatory mechanisms Gleaned after Hospitalization in Trauma-ICU StudyR01GM120484 · NIGMS · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI PATEL, MAYUR B · 2017 to 2021
$3.0M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000445NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR024975NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM120484NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM007347NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM152284
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep learning promises the extraction of valuable information from traumatic brain injury (TBI) datasets and depends on efficient navigation when using large-scale mixed computed tomography (CT) datasets from clinical systems. To ensure a cleaner signal while training deep learning models, removal of computed tomography angiography (CTA) and scans with streaking artifacts is sensible. On massive datasets of heterogeneously sized scans, time-consuming manual quality assurance (QA) by visual inspection is still often necessary, despite the expectation of CTA annotation (artifact annotation is not expected). We propose an automatic QA approach for retrieving CT scans without artifacts by representing 3D scans as 2D axial slice montages and using a multi-headed convolutional neural network to detect CT vs CTA and artifact vs no artifact. We sampled 848 scans from a mixed CT dataset of TBI patients and performed 4-fold stratified cross-validation on 698 montages followed by an ablation experiment-150 stratified montages were withheld for external validation evaluation. Aggregate AUC for our main model was 0.978 for CT detection, 0.675 for artifact detection during cross-validation and 0.965 for CT detection, 0.698 for artifact detection on the external validation set, while the ablated model showed 0.946 for CT detection, 0.735 for artifact detection during cross-validation and 0.937 for CT detection, 0.708 for artifact detection on the external validation set. While our approach is successful for CT detection, artifact detection performance is potentially depressed due to the heterogeneity of present streaking artifacts and a suboptimal number of artifact scans in our training data.

Indexed as

ArtifactsComputed Tomography Angiography (CTA)Computed Tomography (CT)Deep LearningQuality Assurance

Identifiers

PMID36303574
PMCPMC9603717
OpenAlexW4221104318

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.