Cited by 60Ultrasound in Clinical ApplicationsArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationUltrasound Imaging and Elastography

Transforming obstetric ultrasound into data science using eye tracking, voice recording, transducer motion and ultrasound video

Open access
Drukker, Lior, Sharma, Harshita, Droste, Richard, Alsharid, Mohammad, Chatelain, Pierre, Noble, J. Alison, Papageorghiou, Aris T.·2021·Scientific Reports

Abstract

Ultrasound is the primary modality for obstetric imaging and is highly sonographer dependent. Long training period, insufficient recruitment and poor retention of sonographers are among the global challenges in the expansion of ultrasound use. For the past several decades, technical advancements in clinical obstetric ultrasound scanning have largely concerned improving image quality and processing speed. By contrast, sonographers have been acquiring ultrasound images in a similar fashion for several decades. The PULSE (Perception Ultrasound by Learning Sonographer Experience) project is an interdisciplinary multi-modal imaging study aiming to offer clinical sonography insights and transform the process of obstetric ultrasound acquisition and image analysis by applying deep learning to large-scale multi-modal clinical data. A key novelty of the study is that we record full-length ultrasound video with concurrent tracking of the sonographer's eyes, voice and the transducer while performing routine obstetric scans on pregnant women. We provide a detailed description of the novel acquisition system and illustrate how our data can be used to describe clinical ultrasound. Being able to measure different sonographer actions or model tasks will lead to a better understanding of several topics including how to effectively train new sonographers, monitor the learning progress, and enhance the scanning workflow of experts.

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 · 10.1038/s41598-021-92829-1

Cites

48 of 48 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?

  • The PULSE project, presented by Drukker et al., was designed to enable insights into experts' sonography workflow and to transform the learning process of obstetric US using deep-learning algorithms.

    “The PULSE (Perception Ultrasound by Learning Sonographer Experience) project, presented by Drukker et al., was designed to enable insights into experts’ sonography workflow and to transform the learning process of obstetric US using deep-learning algorithms [154].”

    From Evolving the Era of 5D Ultrasound? A Systematic Literature Review on the Applications for Artificial Intelligence Ultrasound Imaging in Obstetrics and Gynecology (2023) · cites this paper as [154]

    The Introduction and Discussion describe PULSE as a project that records expert sonographers’ actions and uses deep learning to study scanning workflow. The Abstract says it aims to transform ultrasound acquisition and image analysis, while the Discussion says the data may help researchers understand how to train sonographers and monitor learning. It does not describe transforming the learning process itself with deep-learning algorithms. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Drukker et al. analyzed eye and transducer movements, actions during scanning, and audio recordings to generate automated image captioning of the sonographer's explanation.

    “While Drukker et al. analyzed eye and transducer movements, actions during scanning, and audio recordings to generate automated image captioning of the sonographer’s explanation”

    From Evolving the Era of 5D Ultrasound? A Systematic Literature Review on the Applications for Artificial Intelligence Ultrasound Imaging in Obstetrics and Gynecology (2023) · cites this paper as [154]

    The Methods (Data analysis; page unavailable) describe analyses of transducer motion, eye tracking, scanning activity, and transcribed audio. The Results (Image captioning; page unavailable) report automatically generated captions modeled on sonographers’ language. The paper does not say that eye movements, transducer movements, or scanning actions were used to generate those captions; it links captioning to transcribed speech and ultrasound images. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • AI in scan workflow automated image labeling.

    “the included studies on this topic showed clinical benefits of AI in scan workflow through automating image labeling [154,157]”

    From Evolving the Era of 5D Ultrasound? A Systematic Literature Review on the Applications for Artificial Intelligence Ultrasound Imaging in Obstetrics and Gynecology (2023) · cites this paper as [154]

    The Results (Workflow analysis; page unavailable) report that a deep neural network automatically labeled 279 obstetric anomaly scans for workflow analysis. The Discussion describes this as a clinically meaningful example, but presents improvements to training, auditing, and scan cost-effectiveness as potential benefits rather than demonstrated clinical outcomes. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [23]Sloetjes, H. & Wittenburg, P. In 6th international Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2008).
  2. [29]Salvucci, D. D. & Goldberg, J. H. In Proceedings of the 2000 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications 71–78 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2000).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Drukker, L., Sharma, H., Droste, R., Alsharid, M., Chatelain, P., Noble, J. A., & Papageorghiou, A. T.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Noble, J. Alison
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2021-07-08
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
14109-14109
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3178709181
Cited by
59
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 1
FWCI
7.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • St George's Online Research Archive (St George's University of London) (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • European Research Council (ERC-ADG-2015 694581)
  • NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Ultrasound in Clinical Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Ultrasound Imaging and Elastography
Keywords
prenatal ultrasound, sonographer training, sonographer experience, eye tracking, voice recording, ultrasound video, deep learning

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