Researcher profile

Mizuho Nishio

Mizuho Nishio contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
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

3 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Automatic detection of acute ischemic stroke using non-contrast computed tomography and two-stage deep learning model

Background and Purpose: We aimed to develop and evaluate an automatic acute ischemic stroke-related (AIS) detection system involving a two-stage deep learning model. Methods: We included 238 cases from two different institutions. AIS-related findings were annotated on each of the 238 sets of head CT images by referring to head magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) images in which an MRI examination was performed within 24 h following the CT scan. These 238 annotated cases were divided into a training set including 189 cases and test set including 49 cases. Subsequently, a two-stage deep learning detection model was constructed from the training set using the You Only Look Once v3 model and Visual Geometry Group 16 classification model. Then, the two-stage model performed the AIS detection process in the test set. To assess the detection model's results, a board-certified radiologist also evaluated the test set head CT images with and without the aid of the detection model. The sensitivity of AIS detection and number of false positives were calculated for the evaluation of the test set detection results. The sensitivity of the radiologist with and without the software detection results was compared using the McNemar test. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: For the two-stage model and radiologist without and with the use of the software results, the sensitivity was 37.3%, 33.3%, and 41.3%, respectively, and the number of false positives per one case was 1.265, 0.327, and 0.388, respectively. On using the two-stage detection model's results, the board-certified radiologist's detection sensitivity significantly improved (p-value = 0.0313). Conclusions: Our detection system involving the two-stage deep learning model significantly improved the radiologist's sensitivity in AIS detection.

preprint2019arXiv

Lung segmentation on chest x-ray images in patients with severe abnormal findings using deep learning

Rationale and objectives: Several studies have evaluated the usefulness of deep learning for lung segmentation using chest x-ray (CXR) images with small- or medium-sized abnormal findings. Here, we built a database including both CXR images with severe abnormalities and experts' lung segmentation results, and aimed to evaluate our network's efficacy in lung segmentation from these images. Materials and Methods: For lung segmentation, CXR images from the Japanese Society of Radiological Technology (JSRT, N = 247) and Montgomery databases (N = 138), were included, and 65 additional images depicting severe abnormalities from a public database were evaluated and annotated by a radiologist, thereby adding lung segmentation results to these images. Baseline U-net was used to segment the lungs in images from the three databases. Subsequently, the U-net network architecture was automatically optimized for lung segmentation from CXR images using Bayesian optimization. Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) was calculated to confirm segmentation. Results: Our results demonstrated that using baseline U-net yielded poorer lung segmentation results in our database than those in the JSRT and Montgomery databases, implying that robust segmentation of lungs may be difficult because of severe abnormalities. The DSC values with baseline U-net for the JSRT, Montgomery and our databases were 0.979, 0.941, and 0.889, respectively, and with optimized U-net, 0.976, 0.973, and 0.932, respectively. Conclusion: For robust lung segmentation, the U-net architecture was optimized via Bayesian optimization, and our results demonstrate that the optimized U-net was more robust than baseline U-net in lung segmentation from CXR images with large-sized abnormalities.

preprint2017arXiv

Computer-aided diagnosis of lung nodule using gradient tree boosting and Bayesian optimization

We aimed to evaluate computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) system for lung nodule classification focusing on (i) usefulness of gradient tree boosting (XGBoost) and (ii) effectiveness of parameter optimization using Bayesian optimization (Tree Parzen Estimator, TPE) and random search. 99 lung nodules (62 lung cancers and 37 benign lung nodules) were included from public databases of CT images. A variant of local binary pattern was used for calculating feature vectors. Support vector machine (SVM) or XGBoost was trained using the feature vectors and their labels. TPE or random search was used for parameter optimization of SVM and XGBoost. Leave-one-out cross-validation was used for optimizing and evaluating the performance of our CADx system. Performance was evaluated using area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic analysis. AUC was calculated 10 times, and its average was obtained. The best averaged AUC of SVM and XGBoost were 0.850 and 0.896, respectively; both were obtained using TPE. XGBoost was generally superior to SVM. Optimal parameters for achieving high AUC were obtained with fewer numbers of trials when using TPE, compared with random search. In conclusion, XGBoost was better than SVM for classifying lung nodules. TPE was more efficient than random search for parameter optimization.