Cited by 26Medical Image Segmentation TechniquesCOVID-19 diagnosis using AIRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging

Development and validation of a deep learning-based framework for automated lung CT segmentation and acute respiratory distress syndrome prediction: a multicenter cohort study

Open access
Zhou, Yang, Mei, Shuya, Wang, Jiemin, Xu, Qiaoyi, Zhang, Zhiyun, Qin, Shaojie, Feng, Jinhua, Li, Congye +7 more·2024·eClinicalMedicine

Abstract

Background: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a life-threatening condition with a high incidence and mortality rate in intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. Early identification of patients at high risk for developing ARDS is crucial for timely intervention and improved clinical outcomes. However, the complex pathophysiology of ARDS makes early prediction challenging. This study aimed to develop an artificial intelligence (AI) model for automated lung lesion segmentation and early prediction of ARDS to facilitate timely intervention in the intensive care unit. Methods: A total of 928 ICU patients with chest computed tomography (CT) scans were included from November 2018 to November 2021 at three centers in China. Patients were divided into a retrospective cohort for model development and internal validation, and three independent cohorts for external validation. A deep learning-based framework using the UNet Transformer (UNETR) model was developed to perform the segmentation of lung lesions and early prediction of ARDS. We employed various data augmentation techniques using the Medical Open Network for AI (MONAI) framework, enhancing the training sample diversity and improving the model's generalization capabilities. The performance of the deep learning-based framework was compared with a Densenet-based image classification network and evaluated in external and prospective validation cohorts. The segmentation performance was assessed using the Dice coefficient (DC), and the prediction performance was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity. The contributions of different features to ARDS prediction were visualized using Shapley Explanation Plots. This study was registered with the China Clinical Trial Registration Centre (ChiCTR2200058700). Findings: The segmentation task using the deep learning framework achieved a DC of 0.734 ± 0.137 in the validation set. For the prediction task, the deep learning-based framework achieved AUCs of 0.916 [0.858-0.961], 0.865 [0.774-0.945], 0.901 [0.835-0.955], and 0.876 [0.804-0.936] in the internal validation cohort, external validation cohort I, external validation cohort II, and prospective validation cohort, respectively. It outperformed the Densenet-based image classification network in terms of prediction accuracy. Moreover, the ARDS prediction model identified lung lesion features and clinical parameters such as C-reactive protein, albumin, bilirubin, platelet count, and age as significant contributors to ARDS prediction. Interpretation: The deep learning-based framework using the UNETR model demonstrated high accuracy and robustness in lung lesion segmentation and early ARDS prediction, and had good generalization ability and clinical applicability. Funding: This study was supported by grants from the Shanghai Renji Hospital Clinical Research Innovation and Cultivation Fund (RJPY-DZX-008) and Shanghai Science and Technology Development Funds (22YF1423300).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102772

Cites

39 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhou, Y., Mei, S., Wang, J., Xu, Q., Zhang, Z., Qin, S., Feng, J., Li, C., Xing, S., Wang, W., Zhang, X., Li, F., Zhou, Q., He, Z., & Gao, Y.
Affiliations
  • Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CN)
  • Fudan University (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Zhou, Quanhong
  • He, Zhengyu
  • Gao, Yuan
Venue
eClinicalMedicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-09
Volume
75
Pages
102772
ISSN
2589-5370 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4401057490
Cited by
26
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 1
FWCI
3.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • EClinicalMedicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Shanghai Science and Technology Development Foundation
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › COVID-19 diagnosis using AI
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Keywords
acute respiratory distress syndrome, ARDS prediction, lung lesion segmentation, chest CT, UNETR, deep learning, intensive care unit patients, early risk stratification, Shapley value, explainable AI, C-reactive protein, albumin, bilirubin, external validation, data augmentation, MONAI, clinical decision support

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