| Literature DB >> 35655731 |
Ela Kaplan1, Tekin Ekinci2, Selcuk Kaplan3, Prabal Datta Barua4,5, Sengul Dogan6, Turker Tuncer6, Ru-San Tan7,8, N Arunkumar9, U Rajendra Acharya10,11,12.
Abstract
Objectives: Fetal sex determination with ultrasound (US) examination is indicated in pregnancies at risk of X-linked genetic disorders or ambiguous genitalia. However, misdiagnoses often arise due to operator inexperience and technical difficulties while acquiring diagnostic images. We aimed to develop an efficient automated US-based fetal sex classification model that can facilitate efficient screening and reduce misclassification.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35655731 PMCID: PMC9132621 DOI: 10.1155/2022/6034971
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Contrast Media Mol Imaging ISSN: 1555-4309 Impact factor: 3.009
Figure 1Examples of fetal ultrasound images showing transverse views of a 20-week female fetus (a) and an 18-week male fetus (b) demonstrating labial folds and phallus, respectively (arrowheads).
Temperature and wildlife count in the three areas covered by the study.
| Age (years), mean ± SD | 25.17 ± 13.72 |
|---|---|
| Obstetric data | |
| Gravida, mean ± SD | 2.3 ± 0.7 |
| Parity, mean ± SD | 2.1 ± 1.2 |
| Abortus, mean ± SD | 0.9 ± 0.6 |
|
| |
| Vaginal birth, | 553 (82.4) |
|
| |
| Caesarean section, | 118 (17.6) |
Number of images used.
| Male | 339 |
| Female | 332 |
| Total | 671 |
Figure 2Schematic of the PFP-LHCINCA fetal ultrasound image sex classification model.
Algorithm 1Algorithm 1 Pseudocode of our proposal.
MATLAB implementation and parameter settings of the PFP-LHCINCA model.
| Method | Parameter |
|---|---|
| Image resizing | 256 × 256 |
| Image decomposition | Average pooling with four levels using 2 × 2, 4 × 4, 8 × 8, and 16 × 16 |
| Patch division | 16 × 16 sized patches |
| LPQ and HOG feature extraction | 341 (256 LPQ and 36 HOG) features are extracted for each patch |
| Feature merging | The concatenation function is merged |
| Chi2 | The most informative 1000 features are selected |
| INCA | Range: [100, 1000]; error function: kNN with 10-fold CV. Herein, |
| Classifiers | kNN: |
| LD: discriminant type: linear, gamma: 0 | |
| NB: kernel: normal, support: unbounded | |
| SVM: kernel function: Gaussian, box constraint: 3, kernel scale: 5.6 | |
| DT: split criterion: deviance, maximum number of splits: 51, surrogate: off | |
| Bayesian optimizer | Acquisition function: expected improvement per second plus, iterations: 100 |
Figure 3Confusion matrices of PFP-LHCINCA model by classifier type. kNN: k-nearest neighbor; LD: linear discriminant; NB: naïve Bayes; SVM: support vector machine; DT: decision tree. (a) kNN. (b) LD. (c) NB. (d) SVM. (e) DT.
Figure 4Receiver operating characteristic curves of the classifiers used in the model. AUC: area under curve; kNN: k-nearest neighbor; LD: linear discriminant; NB: naïve Bayes; SVM: support vector machine; DT: decision tree. (a) kNN, 0.99, (b) LD. (c) NB, 0.89. (d) SVM, 0.98. (e) DT, 0.88.
Performance metrics of PFP-LHCINCA model by classifier type.
| Classifier | Accuracy (%) | Precision (%) | Recall (%) | F1 score (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| kNN | 99.11 | 99.11 | 99.12 | 99.11 |
| LD | 91.21 | 91.70 | 91.15 | 91.43 |
| NB | 89.12 | 89.81 | 89.05 | 89.43 |
| SVM | 98.51 | 98.54 | 98.53 | 98.53 |
| DT | 88.52 | 88.66 | 88.49 | 88.58 |
kNN: k-nearest neighbor; LD: linear discriminant; NB: naïve Bayes; SVM: support vector machine; DT: decision tree.
Figure 5Determining the optimal feature vector with the lowest misclassification using an iterative neighborhood component analysis.
Comparison of PFP-LHCINCA model with published results of other ultrasound-based fetal sex classification methods.
| Study | Method | Dataset | Best accuracy (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maysanjaya et al. [ | Learning vector quantization, artificial vector quantization | 64 males | 63.0% |
|
| |||
| Aljuboori et al. [ | Fuzzy C-mean, discrete wavelet transform, local binary pattern, median, Laplacian filters | 50 males | 94.0% |
|
| |||
| PFP-LHCINCA | Pyramidal fixed-size patch division, local phase quantization and histogram of oriented gradients based feature extraction, hybrid Chi2 and iterative neighborhood component analysis feature selection | 339 males | 99.11% (kNN classifier tuned with Bayesian optimizer) |