Cited by 25Medical Image Segmentation TechniquesArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics

DeepGA for automatically estimating fetal gestational age through ultrasound imaging

Dan, Tingting, Chen, Xijie, He, Miao, Guo, Hongmei, He, Xiaoqin, Chen, Jiazhou, Xian, Jianbo, Hu, Yu +4 more·2023·Artificial Intelligence in Medicine

Abstract

Accurate estimation of gestational age (GA) is vital for identifying fetal abnormalities. Conventionally, GA is estimated by measuring the morphology of the cranium, abdomen, and femur manually and inputting them into the classic Hadlock formula to assess fetal growth. However, this procedure incurs considerable overhead and suffers from bias caused by the operators, yielding suboptimal estimations. To address this challenge, we develop an automatic DeepGA model to achieve fully automatic GA prediction in an end-to-end manner. Our model uses a deep segmentation model (DeepSeg) to accurately identify and segment three critical tissues, including the cranium, abdomen, and femur, in which their morphology is automatically extracted. After that, we are able to directly estimate the GA via a deep regression model (DeepReg). We evaluate DeepGA on a large dataset, including 10,413 ultrasound images from 7113 subjects. It achieves superior performance over the traditional measurement approach, with a mean absolute estimation error (MAE) of 5 days. Our DeepGA model is a novel automatic solution on the basis of artificial intelligence learning that can help radiologists improve the performance of GA estimation in various clinical scenarios, thereby enhancing the efficiency of prenatal examinations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.artmed.2022.102453

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 39 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dan, T., Chen, X., He, M., Guo, H., He, X., Chen, J., Xian, J., Hu, Y., Zhang, B., Wang, N., Xie, H., & Cai, H.
Affiliations
  • South China University of Technology (CN)
  • The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University (CN)
  • Xiamen University (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Xie, Hongning
  • Cai, Hongmin
Venue
Artificial Intelligence in Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-01
Volume
135
Pages
102453
ISSN
0933-3657 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4309635276
Cited by
25
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5
FWCI
1.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2024-03-01)
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Artificial Intelligence in Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Keywords
prenatal ultrasound, femur segmentation, Hadlock formula, prenatal examination
MeSH terms
Artificial Intelligence, Female, Gestational Age, Head, Humans, Pregnancy, Ultrasonography, Ultrasonography, Prenatal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review