ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2024
Automated echocardiography view classification and quality assessment with recognition of unknown views.
Article in Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Simulated Artifacts on the Classification Performance of Apical Views in Transthoracic Echocardiography Using Convolutional Neural Networks.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Development of an Artificial Intelligence-Based System for Evaluating Transthoracic Echocardiographic Imaging in Focus Cardiac Ultrasonography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Interpreting echocardiographic exams requires substantial manual interaction as videos lack scan-plane information and have inconsistent image quality, ranging from clinically relevant to unrecognizable. Thus, a manual prerequisite step for analysis is to select the appropriate views that showcase both the target anatomy and optimal image quality. To automate this selection process, we present a method for automatic classification of routine views, recognition of unknown views, and quality assessment of detected views. Approach: We train a neural network for view classification and employ the logit activations from the neural network for unknown view recognition. Subsequently, we train a linear regression algorithm that uses feature embeddings from the neural network to predict view quality scores. We evaluate the method on a clinical test set of 2466 echocardiography videos with expert-annotated view labels and a subset of 438 videos with expert-rated view quality scores. A second observer annotated a subset of 894 videos, including all quality-rated videos. Results: The proposed method achieved an accuracy of Conclusion: The proposed method approaches expert-level performance, enabling fully automatic selection of the most appropriate views for manual or automatic downstream analysis.
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.