Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42327826›Full record

ArticleMedical image computing and computer-assisted intervention : MICCAI ... International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention2024

Can Crowdsourced Annotations Improve AI-based Congestion Scoring For Bedside Lung Ultrasound?

Ameneh Asgari-Targhi, Tamas Ungi, Mike Jin, Nicholas Harrison, Nicole Duggan, Erik Duhaime, Andrew Goldsmith, Tina Kapur

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention : MICCAI ... International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Ameneh Asgari-TarghiBrigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1971-3962
Tamas UngiQueen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4743-0609
Mike JinBrigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7237-6697
Nicholas HarrisonCentaur Labs, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0002-8331-7833
Nicole DugganBrigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4829-4979
Erik DuhaimeCentaur Labs, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0001-8026-4206
Andrew GoldsmithBrigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0979-7178
Tina KapurBrigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3646-9508

Funding

Deep Learning Assisted Scoring of Point of Care Lung Ultrasound for Acute Decompensated Heart Failure in the Emergency DepartmentR21EB034075 · NIBIB · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI GOLDSMITH, ANDREW, KAPUR, TINA · 2023 to 2024
$716k
NIBIB NIH HHS R21 EB034075
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lung ultrasound (LUS) has become an indispensable tool at the bedside in emergency and acute care settings, offering a fast and non-invasive way to assess pulmonary congestion. Its portability and cost-effectiveness make it particularly valuable in resource-limited environments where quick decision-making is critical. Despite its advantages, the interpretation of B-line artifacts, which are key diagnostic indicators for conditions related to pulmonary congestion, can vary significantly among clinicians and even for the same clinician over time. This variability, coupled with the time pressure in acute settings, poses a challenge. To address this, our study introduces a new B-line segmentation method to calculate congestion scores from LUS images, aiming to standardize interpretations. We utilized a large dataset of 31,000 B-line annotations synthesized from over 550,000 crowdsourced opinions on LUS images of 299 patients to improve model training and accuracy. This approach has yielded a model with 94% accuracy in B-line counting (within a margin of 1) on a test set of 100 patients, demonstrating the potential of combining extensive data and crowdsourcing to refine lung ultrasound analysis for pulmonary congestion.

Indexed as

B-line segmentationcrowdsourcinglow cost imaginglung ultrasound

Identifiers

PMID42327826
PMCPMC13277821

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.