Portrait de Shanel Gauthier n'est pas disponible

Shanel Gauthier

Alumni

Publications

Comparison of Radiologists and Deep Learning for US Grading of Hepatic Steatosis
Pedro Vianna
Sara‐Ivana Calce
Pamela Boustros
Cassandra Larocque-Rigney
Laurent Patry-Beaudoin
Yi Hui Luo
Emre Aslan
John Marinos
Talal Alamri
Kim‐Nhien Vu
Jessica Murphy-Lavallée
Jean-Sébastien Billiard
Emmanuel Montagnon
Hongliang Li
Samuel Kadoury
Bich Nguyen
Shanel Gauthier
Benjamin Therien
Irina Rish
Eugene Belilovsky … (voir 4 de plus)
Guy Wolf
Michael Chassé
Guy Cloutier
An Tang
Background Screening for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is suboptimal due to the subjective interpretation of US images. Purpose T… (voir plus)o evaluate the agreement and diagnostic performance of radiologists and a deep learning model in grading hepatic steatosis in NAFLD at US, with biopsy as the reference standard. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included patients with NAFLD and control patients without hepatic steatosis who underwent abdominal US and contemporaneous liver biopsy from September 2010 to October 2019. Six readers visually graded steatosis on US images twice, 2 weeks apart. Reader agreement was assessed with use of κ statistics. Three deep learning techniques applied to B-mode US images were used to classify dichotomized steatosis grades. Classification performance of human radiologists and the deep learning model for dichotomized steatosis grades (S0, S1, S2, and S3) was assessed with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) on a separate test set. Results The study included 199 patients (mean age, 53 years ± 13 [SD]; 101 men). On the test set (n = 52), radiologists had fair interreader agreement (0.34 [95% CI: 0.31, 0.37]) for classifying steatosis grades S0 versus S1 or higher, while AUCs were between 0.49 and 0.84 for radiologists and 0.85 (95% CI: 0.83, 0.87) for the deep learning model. For S0 or S1 versus S2 or S3, radiologists had fair interreader agreement (0.30 [95% CI: 0.27, 0.33]), while AUCs were between 0.57 and 0.76 for radiologists and 0.73 (95% CI: 0.71, 0.75) for the deep learning model. For S2 or lower versus S3, radiologists had fair interreader agreement (0.37 [95% CI: 0.33, 0.40]), while AUCs were between 0.52 and 0.81 for radiologists and 0.67 (95% CI: 0.64, 0.69) for the deep learning model. Conclusion Deep learning approaches applied to B-mode US images provided comparable performance with human readers for detection and grading of hepatic steatosis. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license. Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Tuthill in this issue.
2023-09-30
Radiology (inconnu)
doi.org
Parametric Scattering Networks
Shanel Gauthier
Benjamin Therien
Laurent Alsène-Racicot
Muawiz Chaudhary
Irina Rish
Eugene Belilovsky
Michael Eickenberg
Guy Wolf
The wavelet scattering transform creates geometric invariants and deformation stability. In multiple signal domains, it has been shown to yi… (voir plus)eld more discriminative representations compared to other non-learned representations and to outperform learned representations in certain tasks, particularly on limited labeled data and highly structured signals. The wavelet filters used in the scattering transform are typically selected to create a tight frame via a parameterized mother wavelet. In this work, we investigate whether this standard wavelet filterbank construction is optimal. Focusing on Morlet wavelets, we propose to learn the scales, orientations, and aspect ratios of the filters to produce problem-specific parameterizations of the scattering transform. We show that our learned versions of the scattering transform yield significant performance gains in small-sample classification settings over the standard scattering transform. Moreover, our empirical results suggest that traditional filterbank constructions may not always be necessary for scattering transforms to extract effective representations.
2022-05-31
2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (publié)
doi.org
arxiv.org