2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.12.512
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

491 ScanNav® audit: an AI-powered screening assistant for fetal anatomical ultrasound

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
4
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In other recent research papers in our field, algorithms have been shown to be useful in identifying the fetal occiput position during labor 8 and in the classification of ovarian tumors as benign or malignant 9 . Additionally, major ultrasound machine manufacturers have unveiled applications that are based on algorithms, although their development and validity often remain unreported for commercial reasons [10][11][12] . Therefore, all of these AI systems should remain at Level 2 of automation (Figure 2) until robust clinical evidence is collected via prospective trials.…”
Section: Drukkermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In other recent research papers in our field, algorithms have been shown to be useful in identifying the fetal occiput position during labor 8 and in the classification of ovarian tumors as benign or malignant 9 . Additionally, major ultrasound machine manufacturers have unveiled applications that are based on algorithms, although their development and validity often remain unreported for commercial reasons [10][11][12] . Therefore, all of these AI systems should remain at Level 2 of automation (Figure 2) until robust clinical evidence is collected via prospective trials.…”
Section: Drukkermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although it is not based on clinical criteria, detailed anatomical annotations are still required in training. A recent evaluation of a real-time Artificial Intelligence (AI) based system that automatically keeps track of acquired images and checks images conform to imaging protocol standards is reported in [17] where five experienced sonographers are used as the reference. A specified pre-defined protocol and annotated locations of anatomical structures are required in the aforementioned methods, which limits transferability to new applications.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Yacub et al took a similar approach, using a neural network to, on the one hand, ascertain the completeness of a sonographic abnormality diagnosis and, on the other, to perform quality control of the image data obtained (in accordance with international guidelines). No differences were demonstrated in this case compared to manual expert assessment [77,78]. The same approaches to modelling now also form the (intelligent) basis for the worldʼs first fully integrated AI tool for automated biometric detection of foetal target structures and AI-supported quality control (SonoLyst) [5].…”
Section: Ai In Standardised Diagnostics Of the Foetal Cnsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Einen ähnlichen Ansatz wählten Yacub et al, die ein neuronales Netzwerk einsetzten, was zum einen der Feststellung der Vollständigkeit einer sonografischen Fehlbildungsdiagnostik und zum anderen der Qualitätskontrolle der gewonnenen Bilddaten (entsprechend den Vorgaben internationaler Richtlinien) diente. Hier zeigten sich im Vergleich zur manuellen Expertenbegutachtung keine Unterschiede 77 , 78 . Die gleichen Modellansätze bilden mittlerweile auch die (intelligente) Basis für das weltweit erste vollständig integrierte KI-Tool (SonoLyst) zur automatisierten biometrischen Erfassung fetaler Zielstrukturen und ebenfalls KI-gestützter Qualitätskontrolle 5 .…”
Section: Ki In Der Standardisierten Diagnostik Des Fetalen Znsunclassified