Automatic quality control of brain T1-weighted magnetic resonance images for a clinical data warehouse

Many studies on machine learning (ML) for computer-aided diagnosis have so far been mostly restricted to high-quality research data. Clinical data warehouses, gathering routine examinations from hospitals, offer great promises for training and validation of ML models in a realistic setting. However, the use of such clinical data warehouses requires quality control (QC) tools. Visual QC by experts is time-consuming and does not scale to large datasets. In this paper, we propose a convolutional neural network (CNN) for the automatic QC of 3D T1-weighted brain MRI for a large heterogeneous clinical data warehouse. To that purpose, we used the data warehouse of the hospitals of the Greater Paris area (Assistance Publique-H\^opitaux de Paris [AP-HP]). Specifically, the objectives were: 1) to identify images which are not proper T1-weighted brain MRIs; 2) to identify acquisitions for which gadolinium was injected; 3) to rate the overall image quality. We used 5000 images for training and validation and a separate set of 500 images for testing. In order to train/validate the CNN, the data were annotated by two trained raters according to a visual QC protocol that we specifically designed for application in the setting of a data warehouse. For objectives 1 and 2, our approach achieved excellent accuracy (balanced accuracy and F1-score \textgreater 90\%), similar to the human raters. For objective 3, the performance was good but substantially lower than that of human raters. Nevertheless, the automatic approach accurately identified (balanced accuracy and F1-score \textgreater 80\%) low quality images, which would typically need to be excluded. Overall, our approach shall be useful for exploiting hospital data warehouses in medical image computing.

PDF Abstract


  Add Datasets introduced or used in this paper

Results from the Paper

  Submit results from this paper to get state-of-the-art GitHub badges and help the community compare results to other papers.


No methods listed for this paper. Add relevant methods here