ArticleScientific reports2024
Deep learning prediction of renal anomalies for prenatal ultrasound diagnosis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prenatal body fluid analysis in the evaluation of CAKUT.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2026Article
- AI-powered insights in pediatric nephrology: current applications and future opportunities.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2026Review
- Dose-Dependent and Non-Autonomous Signaling in CAKUT: A Lineage-Specific Framework from Conditional Knockout Studies.Biomolecules · 2026Review
- Enhancing fetal ultrasound image quality and anatomical plane recognition in low-resource settings using super-resolution models.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence-driven framework for improving prenatal screening for congenital heart disease in rural Nebraska.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Deep learning algorithms have demonstrated remarkable potential in clinical diagnostics, particularly in the field of medical imaging. In this study, we investigated the application of deep learning models in early detection of fetal kidney anomalies. To provide an enhanced interpretation of those models' predictions, we proposed an adapted two-class representation and developed a multi-class model interpretation approach for problems with more than two labels and variable hierarchical grouping of labels. Additionally, we employed the explainable AI (XAI) visualization tools Grad-CAM and HiResCAM, to gain insights into model predictions and identify reasons for misclassifications. The study dataset consisted of 969 ultrasound images from unique patients; 646 control images and 323 cases of kidney anomalies, including 259 cases of unilateral urinary tract dilation and 64 cases of unilateral multicystic dysplastic kidney. The best performing model achieved a cross-validated area under the ROC curve of 91.28% ± 0.52%, with an overall accuracy of 84.03% ± 0.76%, sensitivity of 77.39% ± 1.99%, and specificity of 87.35% ± 1.28%. Our findings emphasize the potential of deep learning models in predicting kidney anomalies from limited prenatal ultrasound imagery. The proposed adaptations in model representation and interpretation represent a novel solution to multi-class prediction problems.
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.