ArticleiGIE : innovation, investigation and insights2023
Deep learning site classification model for automated photodocumentation in upper GI endoscopy (with video).
Article in iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Photodocumentation during EGD can be automated and standardized using deep learning (DL) models for anatomic site classification. EGD video data contain a significant number of suboptimal quality image frames for computational analysis (eg, off-center or blurry). We aimed to develop a DL model that extracts high-quality frames from EGD video data for anatomic classification. Methods: The photodocumentation algorithm consisted of 2 image filters that extract high-quality image frames (appropriately centered, minimal to no blurriness) classified into 1 of 8 anatomic sites: esophagus, gastroesophageal junction, stomach body, fundus, angularis, antrum, duodenal bulb, and duodenum. Model training, testing, and internal validation were performed using 8231 EGD still images and 26,103 video-derived images with an even split among anatomic sites. Images were independently rated per category by 2 gastroenterologists. External validation was performed using an independent dataset of 2142 EGD still images. Model performance (accuracy, F1 score) for 5 EGD videos (6308 frames) was analyzed using a majority vote strategy across 5, 10, 20, and 30 consecutive frame windows. Results: Internal testing and external validation for site classification showed overall accuracies of 98.1% and 95.0%, respectively; F1 scores ranged from 90.0% to 99.0% and 92.0% to 97.0% across anatomic sites, respectively. When applied to EGD video data, overall accuracies ranged from 89.7% to 94.8% across sampling window sizes. Conclusions: We present a DL model capable of extracting high-quality frames from EGD video data and performing subsequent anatomic site classification with acceptable accuracy, allowing automated photodocumentation for consistent study quality and video indexing for annotated study review.
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.