↓ Skip to main content

Deep learning model-assisted detection of kidney stones on computed tomography

Overview of attention for article published in International Brazilian Journal of Urology, October 2022
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Deep learning model-assisted detection of kidney stones on computed tomography
Published in
International Brazilian Journal of Urology, October 2022
DOI 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2022.0132
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alper Caglayan, Mustafa Ozan Horsanali, Kenan Kocadurdu, Eren Ismailoglu, Serkan Guneyli

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the success of a deep learning model in detecting kidney stones in different planes according to stone size on unenhanced computed tomography (CT) images. This retrospective study included 455 patients who underwent CT scanning for kidney stones between January 2016 and January 2020; of them, 405 were diagnosed with kidney stones and 50 were not. Patients with renal stones of 0-1 cm, 1-2 cm, and >2 cm in size were classified into groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Two radiologists reviewed 2,959 CT images of 455 patients in three planes. Subsequently, these CT images were evaluated using a deep learning model. The accuracy rate, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the deep learning model were determined. The training group accuracy rates of the deep learning model were 98.2%, 99.1%, and 97.3% in the axial plane; 99.1%, 98.2%, and 97.3% in the coronal plane; and 98.2%, 98.2%, and 98.2% in the sagittal plane, respectively. The testing group accuracy rates of the deep learning model were 78%, 68% and 70% in the axial plane; 63%, 72%, and 64% in the coronal plane; and 85%, 89%, and 93% in the sagittal plane, respectively. The use of deep learning algorithms for the detection of kidney stones is reliable and effective. Additionally, these algorithms can reduce the reporting time and cost of CT-dependent urolithiasis detection, leading to early diagnosis and management.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 4 9%
Student > Master 3 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 7%
Other 2 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 29 64%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 6 13%
Unspecified 4 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 7%
Engineering 2 4%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 29 64%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 July 2022.
All research outputs
#20,170,265
of 25,658,541 outputs
Outputs from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#456
of 731 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#306,856
of 440,659 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#6
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,658,541 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 731 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 440,659 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.