Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 45 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 54 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 22 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 20 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 99 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 183 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 467 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 38 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Deep Learning to Quantify Pulmonary Edema in Chest Radiographs (2008.05975v2)

Published 13 Aug 2020 in eess.IV and cs.CV

Abstract: Purpose: To develop a machine learning model to classify the severity grades of pulmonary edema on chest radiographs. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, 369,071 chest radiographs and associated radiology reports from 64,581 (mean age, 51.71; 54.51% women) patients from the MIMIC-CXR chest radiograph dataset were included. This dataset was split into patients with and without congestive heart failure (CHF). Pulmonary edema severity labels from the associated radiology reports were extracted from patients with CHF as four different ordinal levels: 0, no edema; 1, vascular congestion; 2, interstitial edema; and 3, alveolar edema. Deep learning models were developed using two approaches: a semi-supervised model using a variational autoencoder and a pre-trained supervised learning model using a dense neural network. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed on both models. Results: The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for differentiating alveolar edema from no edema was 0.99 for the semi-supervised model and 0.87 for the pre-trained models. Performance of the algorithm was inversely related to the difficulty in categorizing milder states of pulmonary edema (shown as AUCs for semi-supervised model and pre-trained model, respectively): 2 versus 0, 0.88 and 0.81; 1 versus 0, 0.79 and 0.66; 3 versus 1, 0.93 and 0.82; 2 versus 1, 0.69 and 0.73; and, 3 versus 2, 0.88 and 0.63. Conclusion: Deep learning models were trained on a large chest radiograph dataset and could grade the severity of pulmonary edema on chest radiographs with high performance.

Citations (33)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Lightbulb On Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.