ArticleBMC medical imaging2024
Comparison and analysis of deep learning models for discriminating longitudinal and oblique vaginal septa based on ultrasound imaging.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2024. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe longitudinal vaginal septum and oblique vaginal septum are female müllerian duct anomalies that are relatively less diagnosed but severely fertility-threatening in clinical practice. Ultrasound imaging is commonly used to examine the two vaginal malformations, but in fact it's difficult to make an accurate differential diagnosis. This study is intended to assess the performance of multiple deep learning models based on ultrasonographic images for distinguishing longitudinal vaginal septum and oblique vaginal septum.
methodsThe cases and ultrasound images of longitudinal vaginal septum and oblique vaginal septum were collected. Two convolutional neural network (CNN)-based models (ResNet50 and ConvNeXt-B) and one base resolution variant of vision transformer (ViT)-based neural network (ViT-B/16) were selected to construct ultrasonographic classification models. The receiver operating curve analysis and four indicators including accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (AUC) were used to compare the diagnostic performance of deep learning models.
resultsA total of 70 cases with 426 ultrasound images were included for deep learning models construction using 5-fold cross-validation. Convolutional neural network-based models (ResNet50 and ConvNeXt-B) presented significantly better case-level discriminative efficacy with accuracy of 0.842 (variance, 0.004, 95%CI, [0.639-0.997]) and 0.897 (variance, 0.004, [95%CI, 0.734-1.000]), specificity of 0.709 (variance, 0.041, [95%CI, 0.505-0.905]) and 0.811 (variance, 0.017, [95%CI, 0.622-0.979]), and AUC of 0.842 (variance, 0.004, [95%CI, 0.639-0.997]) and 0.897 (variance, 0.004, [95%CI, 0.734-1.000]) than transformer-based model (ViT-B/16) with its accuracy of 0.668 (variance, 0.014, [95%CI, 0.407-0.920]), specificity of 0.572 (variance, 0.024, [95%CI, 0.304-0.831]) and AUC of 0.681 (variance, 0.030, [95%CI, 0.434-0.908]). There was no significance of AUC between ConvNeXt-B and ResNet50 (P = 0.841).
conclusionsConvolutional neural network-based model (ConvNeXt-B) shows promising capability of discriminating longitudinal and oblique vaginal septa ultrasound images and is expected to be introduced to clinical ultrasonographic diagnostic system.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.