BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Io Flament

Io Flament contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Computer Visioneess.IVMachine Learning

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Hierarchical Severity Staging of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries using Deep Learning with MRI Images

Purpose: To evaluate the diagnostic utility of two convolutional neural networks (CNNs) for severity staging of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries. Materials and Methods: This retrospective analysis was conducted on 1243 knee MR images (1008 intact, 18 partially torn, 77 fully torn, and 140 reconstructed ACLs) from 224 patients (age 47 +/- 14 years, 54% women) acquired between 2011 and 2014. The radiologists used a modified scoring metric. To classify ACL injuries with deep learning, two types of CNNs were used, one with three-dimensional (3D) and the other with two-dimensional (2D) convolutional kernels. Performance metrics included sensitivity, specificity, weighted Cohen's kappa, and overall accuracy, followed by McNemar's test to compare the CNNs performance. Results: The overall accuracy and weighted Cohen's kappa reported for ACL injury classification were higher using the 2D CNN (accuracy: 92% (233/254) and kappa: 0.83) than the 3D CNN (accuracy: 89% (225/254) and kappa: 0.83) (P = .27). The 2D CNN and 3D CNN performed similarly in classifying intact ACLs (2D CNN: 93% (188/203) sensitivity and 90% (46/51) specificity; 3D CNN: 89% (180/203) sensitivity and 88% (45/51) specificity). Classification of full tears by both networks were also comparable (2D CNN: 82% (14/17) sensitivity and 94% (222/237) specificity; 3D CNN: 76% (13/17) sensitivity and 100% (236/237) specificity). The 2D CNN classified all reconstructed ACLs correctly. Conclusion: 2D and 3D CNNs applied to ACL lesion classification had high sensitivity and specificity, suggesting that these networks could be used to help grade ACL injuries by non-experts.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

The International Workshop on Osteoarthritis Imaging Knee MRI Segmentation Challenge: A Multi-Institute Evaluation and Analysis Framework on a Standardized Dataset

Purpose: To organize a knee MRI segmentation challenge for characterizing the semantic and clinical efficacy of automatic segmentation methods relevant for monitoring osteoarthritis progression. Methods: A dataset partition consisting of 3D knee MRI from 88 subjects at two timepoints with ground-truth articular (femoral, tibial, patellar) cartilage and meniscus segmentations was standardized. Challenge submissions and a majority-vote ensemble were evaluated using Dice score, average symmetric surface distance, volumetric overlap error, and coefficient of variation on a hold-out test set. Similarities in network segmentations were evaluated using pairwise Dice correlations. Articular cartilage thickness was computed per-scan and longitudinally. Correlation between thickness error and segmentation metrics was measured using Pearson&#39;s coefficient. Two empirical upper bounds for ensemble performance were computed using combinations of model outputs that consolidated true positives and true negatives. Results: Six teams (T1-T6) submitted entries for the challenge. No significant differences were observed across all segmentation metrics for all tissues (p=1.0) among the four top-performing networks (T2, T3, T4, T6). Dice correlations between network pairs were high (>0.85). Per-scan thickness errors were negligible among T1-T4 (p=0.99) and longitudinal changes showed minimal bias (<0.03mm). Low correlations (<0.41) were observed between segmentation metrics and thickness error. The majority-vote ensemble was comparable to top performing networks (p=1.0). Empirical upper bound performances were similar for both combinations (p=1.0). Conclusion: Diverse networks learned to segment the knee similarly where high segmentation accuracy did not correlate to cartilage thickness accuracy. Voting ensembles did not outperform individual networks but may help regularize individual models.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access