Evaluation of deep convolutional neural networks for automatic classification of common maternal fetal ultrasound planes
Open accessAbstract
The goal of this study was to evaluate the maturity of current Deep Learning classification techniques for their application in a real maternal-fetal clinical environment. A large dataset of routinely acquired maternal-fetal screening ultrasound images (which will be made publicly available) was collected from two different hospitals by several operators and ultrasound machines. All images were manually labeled by an expert maternal fetal clinician. Images were divided into 6 classes: four of the most widely used fetal anatomical planes (Abdomen, Brain, Femur and Thorax), the mother's cervix (widely used for prematurity screening) and a general category to include any other less common image plane. Fetal brain images were further categorized into the 3 most common fetal brain planes (Trans-thalamic, Trans-cerebellum, Trans-ventricular) to judge fine grain categorization performance. The final dataset is comprised of over 12,400 images from 1,792 patients, making it the largest ultrasound dataset to date. We then evaluated a wide variety of state-of-the-art deep Convolutional Neural Networks on this dataset and analyzed results in depth, comparing the computational models to research technicians, which are the ones currently performing the task daily. Results indicate for the first time that computational models have similar performance compared to humans when classifying common planes in human fetal examination. However, the dataset leaves the door open on future research to further improve results, especially on fine-grained plane categorization.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Population-based studies consistently report CHD detection rates of around 40% to 50%.
“Correspondingly, population-based studies consistently report detection rates of around 40% to 50% [10].”
From Deep Learning for Improving the Effectiveness of Routine Prenatal Screening for Major Congenital Heart Diseases (2022) · cites this paper as [10]
Previous research using DL methods from fetal ultrasound images can help increase the detection of fetal heart abnormalities compared to human experts.
“The results obtained following previous research using the DL method from fetal US images can help increase the detection of fetal heart abnormalities compared to human experts [10,17,18,24].”
From Deep Learning for Improving the Effectiveness of Routine Prenatal Screening for Major Congenital Heart Diseases (2022) · cites this paper as [10]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 37 · Cited by 240
- Authors
- Burgos-Artizzu, X. P., Coronado-Gutiérrez, D., Valenzuela-Alcaraz, B., Bonet-Carne, E., Eixarch, E., Crispi, F., & Gratacós, E.
- Affiliations
- Hospital Sant Joan de Déu Barcelona (ES)
- Corresponding author
- Burgos-Artizzu, Xavier P.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Scientific Reports
- Published
- 2020-06-23
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 10200-10200
- ISSN
- 2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC7311420
- OpenAlex
- W3036165397
- Cited by
- 240
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 43 · 2025: 64 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 24
- FWCI
- 6.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- correction (2022-01-31)
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Dipòsit Digital de la Universitat de Barcelona (Universitat de Barcelona) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Dipòsit Digital de la Universitat de Barcelona (Universitat de Barcelona) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
- Keywords
- deep convolutional neural networks, prenatal ultrasound, ultrasound image classification, uterine cervix, fine-grained classification
- MeSH terms
- Machine Learning, Algorithms, Brain, Female, Fetus, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Pregnancy, Ultrasonography, Prenatal, Neural Networks, Computer
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