ArticlePloS one2024
BUSClean: Open-source software for breast ultrasound image pre-processing and knowledge extraction for medical AI.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- STL-DeepBDC: A Robust Few-Shot Learning Framework for Multiclass Ovarian Tumor Classification in Ultrasound Outperforms Conventional Transfer Learning.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Prediction of mammographic breast density based on clinical breast ultrasound images using deep learning: a retrospective analysis.Lancet regional health. Americas · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Development of artificial intelligence (AI) for medical imaging demands curation and cleaning of large-scale clinical datasets comprising hundreds of thousands of images. Some modalities, such as mammography, contain highly standardized imaging. In contrast, breast ultrasound imaging (BUS) can contain many irregularities not indicated by scan metadata, such as enhanced scan modes, sonographer annotations, or additional views. We present an open-source software solution for automatically processing clinical BUS datasets. The algorithm performs BUS scan filtering (flagging of invalid and non-B-mode scans), cleaning (dual-view scan detection, scan area cropping, and caliper detection), and knowledge extraction (BI-RADS Labeling and Measurement fields) from sonographer annotations. Its modular design enables users to adapt it to new settings. Experiments on an internal testing dataset of 430 clinical BUS images achieve >95% sensitivity and >98% specificity in detecting every type of text annotation, >98% sensitivity and specificity in detecting scans with blood flow highlighting, alternative scan modes, or invalid scans. A case study on a completely external, public dataset of BUS scans found that BUSClean identified text annotations and scans with blood flow highlighting with 88.6% and 90.9% sensitivity and 98.3% and 99.9% specificity, respectively. Adaptation of the lesion caliper detection method to account for a type of caliper specific to the case study demonstrates the intended use of BUSClean in new data distributions and improved performance in lesion caliper detection from 43.3% and 93.3% out-of-the-box to 92.1% and 92.3% sensitivity and specificity, respectively. Source code, example notebooks, and sample data are available at https://github.com/hawaii-ai/bus-cleaning.
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.