ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2023
Deep learning model for prenatal congenital heart disease (CHD) screening generalizes to the community setting and outperforms clinical detection.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2023. 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.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Congenital heart defects (CHD) are still missed despite nearly universal prenatal ultrasound screening programs, which may result in severe morbidity or even death. Deep machine learning (DL) can automate image recognition from ultrasound. The aim of this study was to apply a previously developed DL model trained on images from a tertiary center, to fetal ultrasound images obtained during the second-trimester standard anomaly scan in a low-risk population. Methods: All pregnancies with isolated severe CHD in the Northwestern region of the Netherlands between 2015 and 2016 with available stored images were evaluated, as well as a sample of normal fetuses' examinations from the same region. We compared initial clinical diagnostic accuracy (made in real time), model accuracy, and performance of blinded human experts with access only to the stored images (like the model). We analyzed performance by study characteristics such as duration, quality (independently scored by study investigators), number of stored images, and availability of screening views. Results: A total of 42 normal fetuses and 66 cases of isolated CHD at birth were analyzed. Of the abnormal cases, 31 were missed and 35 were detected at the time of the clinical anatomy scan (sensitivity 53 percent). Model sensitivity and specificity was 91 and 93 percent, respectively. Blinded human experts (n=3) achieved sensitivity and specificity of 55±10 percent (range 47-67 percent) and 71±13 percent (range 57-83 percent), respectively. There was a statistically significant difference in model correctness by expert-grader quality score (p=0.04). Abnormal cases included 19 lesions the model had not encountered in its training; the model's performance (15/19 correct) was not statistically significantly different on previously encountered vs. never before seen lesions (p=0.07). Conclusions: A previously trained DL algorithm out-performed human experts in detecting CHD in a cohort in which over 50 percent of CHD cases were initially missed clinically. Notably, the DL algorithm performed well on community-acquired images in a low-risk population, including lesions it had not been previously exposed to. Furthermore, when both the model and blinded human experts had access to stored images alone, the model outperformed expert humans. Together, these findings support the proposition that use of DL models can improve prenatal detection of CHD.
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.