Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros












Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
JAMA ; 332(8): 649-657, 2024 08 27.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39088200

RESUMEN

Importance: Accurate assessment of gestational age (GA) is essential to good pregnancy care but often requires ultrasonography, which may not be available in low-resource settings. This study developed a deep learning artificial intelligence (AI) model to estimate GA from blind ultrasonography sweeps and incorporated it into the software of a low-cost, battery-powered device. Objective: To evaluate GA estimation accuracy of an AI-enabled ultrasonography tool when used by novice users with no prior training in sonography. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective diagnostic accuracy study enrolled 400 individuals with viable, single, nonanomalous, first-trimester pregnancies in Lusaka, Zambia, and Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Credentialed sonographers established the "ground truth" GA via transvaginal crown-rump length measurement. At random follow-up visits throughout gestation, including a primary evaluation window from 14 0/7 weeks' to 27 6/7 weeks' gestation, novice users obtained blind sweeps of the maternal abdomen using the AI-enabled device (index test) and credentialed sonographers performed fetal biometry with a high-specification machine (study standard). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the mean absolute error (MAE) of the index test and study standard, which was calculated by comparing each method's estimate to the previously established GA and considered equivalent if the difference fell within a prespecified margin of ±2 days. Results: In the primary evaluation window, the AI-enabled device met criteria for equivalence to the study standard, with an MAE (SE) of 3.2 (0.1) days vs 3.0 (0.1) days (difference, 0.2 days [95% CI, -0.1 to 0.5]). Additionally, the percentage of assessments within 7 days of the ground truth GA was comparable (90.7% for the index test vs 92.5% for the study standard). Performance was consistent in prespecified subgroups, including the Zambia and North Carolina cohorts and those with high body mass index. Conclusions and Relevance: Between 14 and 27 weeks' gestation, novice users with no prior training in ultrasonography estimated GA as accurately with the low-cost, point-of-care AI tool as credentialed sonographers performing standard biometry on high-specification machines. These findings have immediate implications for obstetrical care in low-resource settings, advancing the World Health Organization goal of ultrasonography estimation of GA for all pregnant people. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05433519.


Asunto(s)
Inteligencia Artificial , Edad Gestacional , Ultrasonografía Prenatal , Adulto , Femenino , Humanos , Embarazo , Biometría/métodos , Largo Cráneo-Cadera , Sistemas de Atención de Punto/economía , Primer Trimestre del Embarazo , Estudios Prospectivos , Programas Informáticos , Ultrasonografía Prenatal/economía , Ultrasonografía Prenatal/instrumentación , Ultrasonografía Prenatal/métodos , Zambia
2.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet ; 165(3): 1013-1021, 2024 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38189177

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Low-cost devices have made obstetric sonography possible in settings where it was previously unfeasible, but ensuring quality and consistency at scale remains a challenge. In the present study, we sought to create a tool to reduce substandard fetal biometry measurement while minimizing care disruption. METHODS: We developed a deep learning artificial intelligence (AI) model to estimate gestational age (GA) in the second and third trimester from fly-to cineloops-brief videos acquired during routine ultrasound biometry-and evaluated its performance in comparison to expert sonographer measurement. We then introduced random error into fetal biometry measurements and analyzed the ability of the AI model to flag grossly inaccurate measurements such as those that might be obtained by a novice. RESULTS: The mean absolute error (MAE) of our model (±standard error) was 3.87 ± 0.07 days, compared to 4.80 ± 0.10 days for expert biometry (difference -0.92 days; 95% CI: -1.10 to -0.76). Based on simulated novice biometry with average absolute error of 7.5%, our model reliably detected cases where novice biometry differed from expert biometry by 10 days or more, with an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.93 (95% CI: 0.92, 0.95), sensitivity of 81.0% (95% CI: 77.9, 83.8), and specificity of 89.9% (95% CI: 88.1, 91.5). These results held across a range of sensitivity analyses, including where the model was provided suboptimal truncated fly-to cineloops. CONCLUSIONS: Our AI model estimated GA more accurately than expert biometry. Because fly-to cineloop videos can be obtained without any change to sonographer workflow, the model represents a no-cost guardrail that could be incorporated into both low-cost and commercial ultrasound devices to prevent reporting of most gross GA estimation errors.


Asunto(s)
Aprendizaje Profundo , Edad Gestacional , Ultrasonografía Prenatal , Humanos , Ultrasonografía Prenatal/normas , Ultrasonografía Prenatal/métodos , Embarazo , Femenino , Control de Calidad , Grabación en Video , Biometría/métodos , Tercer Trimestre del Embarazo , Segundo Trimestre del Embarazo
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...