ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2025
Deep learning for accurate B-line detection and localization in lung ultrasound imaging.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2025. 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.
- Sex estimation from hand-wrist radiographic images: an artificial intelligence approach.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- A dataset of lung ultrasound images for automated AI-based lung disease classification.Data in brief · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Lung ultrasound (LUS) has become an essential imaging modality for assessing various pulmonary conditions, including the presence of B-line artifacts. These artifacts are commonly associated with conditions such as increased extravascular lung water, decompensated heart failure, dialysis-related chronic kidney disease, interstitial lung disease, and COVID-19 pneumonia. Accurate detection of the B-line in LUS images is crucial for effective diagnosis and treatment. However, interpreting LUS is often subject to observer variability, requiring significant expertise and posing challenges in resource-limited settings with few trained professionals. Methods: To address these limitations, deep learning models have been developed for automated B-line detection and localization. This study introduces YOLOv5-PBB and YOLOv8-PBB, two modified models based on YOLOv5 and YOLOv8, respectively, designed for precise and interpretable B-line localization using polygonal bounding boxes (PBBs). YOLOv5-PBB was enhanced by modifying the detection head, loss function, non-maximum suppression, and data loader to enable PBB localization. YOLOv8-PBB was customized to convert segmentation masks into polygonal representations, displaying only boundaries while removing the masks. Additionally, an image preprocessing technique was incorporated into the models to enhance LUS image quality. The models were trained on a diverse dataset from a publicly available repository and Ugandan health facilities. Results: Experimental results showed that YOLOv8-PBB achieved the highest precision (0.947), recall (0.926), and mean average precision (0.957). YOLOv5-PBB, while slightly lower in performance (precision: 0.931, recall: 0.918, mAP: 0.936), had advantages in model size (14 MB vs. 21 MB) and average inference time (33.1 ms vs. 47.7 ms), making it more suitable for real-time applications in low-resource settings. Discussion: The integration of these models into a mobile LUS screening tool provides a promising solution for B-line localization in resource-limited settings, where accessibility to trained professionals may be scarce. The YOLOv5-PBB and YOLOv8-PBB models offer high performance while addressing challenges related to inference speed and model size, making them ideal candidates for mobile deployment in such environments.
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.