ArticleCritical care (London, England)2023
A deep learning model enables accurate prediction and quantification of pulmonary edema from chest X-rays.
Article in Critical care (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhanced Detection of Pulmonary Edema in Chest X-rays Using Deep Learning Ensembles with Attention Mechanism.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- The value of cardiopulmonary ultrasound in diagnosing cardiogenic pulmonary edema in patients with heart failure.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Assessment of a Grad-CAM interpretable deep learning model for HAPE diagnosis: performance and pitfalls in severity stratification from chest radiographs.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence interpretation of chest radiographs in intensive care. Ready for prime time?Intensive care medicine · 2025Article
- Navigating the extravascular lung waters of pulmonary edema in COVID-19 ARDS.American journal of physiology. Lung cellular and molecular physiology · 2025Article
- Predicting elevated natriuretic peptide in chest radiography: emerging utilization gap for artificial intelligence.European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA quantitative assessment of pulmonary edema is important because the clinical severity can range from mild impairment to life threatening. A quantitative surrogate measure, although invasive, for pulmonary edema is the extravascular lung water index (EVLWI) extracted from the transpulmonary thermodilution (TPTD). Severity of edema from chest X-rays, to date is based on the subjective classification of radiologists. In this work, we use machine learning to quantitatively predict the severity of pulmonary edema from chest radiography.
methodsWe retrospectively included 471 X-rays from 431 patients who underwent chest radiography and TPTD measurement within 24 h at our intensive care unit. The EVLWI extracted from the TPTD was used as a quantitative measure for pulmonary edema. We used a deep learning approach and binned the data into two, three, four and five classes increasing the resolution of the EVLWI prediction from the X-rays.
resultsThe accuracy, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and Mathews correlation coefficient (MCC) in the binary classification models (EVLWI < 15, ≥ 15) were 0.93 (accuracy), 0.98 (AUROC) and 0.86(MCC). In the three multiclass models, the accuracy ranged between 0.90 and 0.95, the AUROC between 0.97 and 0.99 and the MCC between 0.86 and 0.92.
conclusionDeep learning can quantify pulmonary edema as measured by EVLWI with high accuracy.
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.