Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37924750›Full record

ArticleMedical image analysis2024

Seeking an optimal approach for Computer-aided Diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism.

Nahid Ul Islam, Zongwei Zhou, Shiv Gehlot, Michael B Gotway, Jianming Liang

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical image analysis, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Nahid Ul IslamSchool of Computing and Augmented Intelligence, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85281, USA.
Zongwei ZhouDepartment of Computer Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.
Shiv GehlotBiomedical Informants Program, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA.
Michael B GotwayDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA.
Jianming LiangBiomedical Informants Program, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA. Electronic address: Jianming.Liang@asu.edu.
Arizona State University · USJohns Hopkins University · USWinnMed · US

Funding

Computer-Aided Diagnosis of Pulmonary EmbolismR01HL128785 · NHLBI · ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY-TEMPE CAMPUS · PI LIANG, JIANMING · 2016 to 2019
$2.5M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL128785
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pulmonary Embolism (PE) represents a thrombus ("blood clot"), usually originating from a lower extremity vein, that travels to the blood vessels in the lung, causing vascular obstruction and in some patients death. This disorder is commonly diagnosed using Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiography (CTPA). Deep learning holds great promise for the Computer-aided Diagnosis (CAD) of PE. However, numerous deep learning methods, such as Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) and Transformer-based models, exist for a given task, causing great confusion regarding the development of CAD systems for PE. To address this confusion, we present a comprehensive analysis of competing deep learning methods applicable to PE diagnosis based on four datasets. First, we use the RSNA PE dataset, which includes (weak) slice-level and exam-level labels, for PE classification and diagnosis, respectively. At the slice level, we compare CNNs with the Vision Transformer (ViT) and the Swin Transformer. We also investigate the impact of self-supervised versus (fully) supervised ImageNet pre-training, and transfer learning over training models from scratch. Additionally, at the exam level, we compare sequence model learning with our proposed transformer-based architecture, Embedding-based ViT (E-ViT). For the second and third datasets, we utilize the CAD-PE Challenge Dataset and Ferdowsi University of Mashad's PE Dataset, where we convert (strong) clot-level masks into slice-level annotations to evaluate the optimal CNN model for slice-level PE classification. Finally, we use our in-house PE-CAD dataset, which contains (strong) clot-level masks. Here, we investigate the impact of our vessel-oriented image representations and self-supervised pre-training on PE false positive reduction at the clot level across image dimensions (2D, 2.5D, and 3D). Our experiments show that (1) transfer learning boosts performance despite differences between photographic images and CTPA scans; (2) self-supervised pre-training can surpass (fully) supervised pre-training; (3) transformer-based models demonstrate comparable performance but slower convergence compared with CNNs for slice-level PE classification; (4) model trained on the RSNA PE dataset demonstrates promising performance when tested on unseen datasets for slice-level PE classification; (5) our E-ViT framework excels in handling variable numbers of slices and outperforms sequence model learning for exam-level diagnosis; and (6) vessel-oriented image representation and self-supervised pre-training both enhance performance for PE false positive reduction across image dimensions. Our optimal approach surpasses state-of-the-art results on the RSNA PE dataset, enhancing AUC by 0.62% (slice-level) and 2.22% (exam-level). On our in-house PE-CAD dataset, 3D vessel-oriented images improve performance from 80.07% to 91.35%, a remarkable 11% gain. Codes are available at GitHub.com/JLiangLab/CAD_PE.

Indexed as

Diagnosis, Computer-AssistedPulmonary EmbolismComputersHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalNeural Networks, ComputerCNNsPulmonary embolismSelf-supervised learningSupervised learningSwin transformerTransfer learningVision transformer

Identifiers

PMID37924750
PMCPMC11039560
OpenAlexW4387618960

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.