new

Get trending papers in your email inbox!

Subscribe

byAK and the research community

Mar 14

Generative augmentations for improved cardiac ultrasound segmentation using diffusion models

One of the main challenges in current research on segmentation in cardiac ultrasound is the lack of large and varied labeled datasets and the differences in annotation conventions between datasets. This makes it difficult to design robust segmentation models that generalize well to external datasets. This work utilizes diffusion models to create generative augmentations that can significantly improve diversity of the dataset and thus the generalisability of segmentation models without the need for more annotated data. The augmentations are applied in addition to regular augmentations. A visual test survey showed that experts cannot clearly distinguish between real and fully generated images. Using the proposed generative augmentations, segmentation robustness was increased when training on an internal dataset and testing on an external dataset with an improvement of over 20 millimeters in Hausdorff distance. Additionally, the limits of agreement for automatic ejection fraction estimation improved by up to 20% of absolute ejection fraction value on out of distribution cases. These improvements come exclusively from the increased variation of the training data using the generative augmentations, without modifying the underlying machine learning model. The augmentation tool is available as an open source Python library at https://github.com/GillesVanDeVyver/EchoGAINS.

Evaluation of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 for supporting real-world information needs in healthcare delivery

Despite growing interest in using large language models (LLMs) in healthcare, current explorations do not assess the real-world utility and safety of LLMs in clinical settings. Our objective was to determine whether two LLMs can serve information needs submitted by physicians as questions to an informatics consultation service in a safe and concordant manner. Sixty six questions from an informatics consult service were submitted to GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 via simple prompts. 12 physicians assessed the LLM responses' possibility of patient harm and concordance with existing reports from an informatics consultation service. Physician assessments were summarized based on majority vote. For no questions did a majority of physicians deem either LLM response as harmful. For GPT-3.5, responses to 8 questions were concordant with the informatics consult report, 20 discordant, and 9 were unable to be assessed. There were 29 responses with no majority on "Agree", "Disagree", and "Unable to assess". For GPT-4, responses to 13 questions were concordant, 15 discordant, and 3 were unable to be assessed. There were 35 responses with no majority. Responses from both LLMs were largely devoid of overt harm, but less than 20% of the responses agreed with an answer from an informatics consultation service, responses contained hallucinated references, and physicians were divided on what constitutes harm. These results suggest that while general purpose LLMs are able to provide safe and credible responses, they often do not meet the specific information need of a given question. A definitive evaluation of the usefulness of LLMs in healthcare settings will likely require additional research on prompt engineering, calibration, and custom-tailoring of general purpose models.