Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jan 3;6(1):e2248685.
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.48685.

Development of a Machine Learning Model for Sonographic Assessment of Gestational Age

Affiliations

Development of a Machine Learning Model for Sonographic Assessment of Gestational Age

Chace Lee et al. JAMA Netw Open. .

Abstract

Importance: Fetal ultrasonography is essential for confirmation of gestational age (GA), and accurate GA assessment is important for providing appropriate care throughout pregnancy and for identifying complications, including fetal growth disorders. Derivation of GA from manual fetal biometry measurements (ie, head, abdomen, and femur) is operator dependent and time-consuming.

Objective: To develop artificial intelligence (AI) models to estimate GA with higher accuracy and reliability, leveraging standard biometry images and fly-to ultrasonography videos.

Design, setting, and participants: To improve GA estimates, this diagnostic study used AI to interpret standard plane ultrasonography images and fly-to ultrasonography videos, which are 5- to 10-second videos that can be automatically recorded as part of the standard of care before the still image is captured. Three AI models were developed and validated: (1) an image model using standard plane images, (2) a video model using fly-to videos, and (3) an ensemble model (combining both image and video models). The models were trained and evaluated on data from the Fetal Age Machine Learning Initiative (FAMLI) cohort, which included participants from 2 study sites at Chapel Hill, North Carolina (US), and Lusaka, Zambia. Participants were eligible to be part of this study if they received routine antenatal care at 1 of these sites, were aged 18 years or older, had a viable intrauterine singleton pregnancy, and could provide written consent. They were not eligible if they had known uterine or fetal abnormality, or had any other conditions that would make participation unsafe or complicate interpretation. Data analysis was performed from January to July 2022.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary analysis outcome for GA was the mean difference in absolute error between the GA model estimate and the clinical standard estimate, with the ground truth GA extrapolated from the initial GA estimated at an initial examination.

Results: Of the total cohort of 3842 participants, data were calculated for a test set of 404 participants with a mean (SD) age of 28.8 (5.6) years at enrollment. All models were statistically superior to standard fetal biometry-based GA estimates derived from images captured by expert sonographers. The ensemble model had the lowest mean absolute error compared with the clinical standard fetal biometry (mean [SD] difference, -1.51 [3.96] days; 95% CI, -1.90 to -1.10 days). All 3 models outperformed standard biometry by a more substantial margin on fetuses that were predicted to be small for their GA.

Conclusions and relevance: These findings suggest that AI models have the potential to empower trained operators to estimate GA with higher accuracy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Mr Lee reported owning stock in Google, Inc, as part of the standard employee compensation plan and having a patent for Google issued (20220354466). Ms Willis reported owning stock in Google, Inc, as part of the standard employee compensation package. Dr Sieniek reported receiving personal fees from Google, Inc, and owning stock of Alphabet during the conduct of the study. Dr Pilgrim reported owning stock in Google, Inc, as part of the standard employee compensation plan. Dr Tse reported receiving personal fees from Google, Inc, and having a patent for Google, Inc, issued. Dr Gomes reported owning stock in Google, Inc, as part of the standard employee compensation plan. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Gestational Age (GA) Estimation
A, Model and standard fetal biometry estimates of mean absolute error (MAE) vs ground truth GA (4-week GA windows). B, Model and standard fetal biometry estimate absolute error distribution estimate more as gestational age increases. C, Error distributions for ensemble model and standard fetal biometry procedure. The error distribution of standard fetal biometry procedure has longer tails on both sides. D, Paired errors for ensemble model and standard fetal biometry estimates in the same study visit. The errors of the 2 methods exhibit correlation, but the worst-case errors for the ensemble model have a lower magnitude than the standard fetal biometry method.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Gestational Age (GA) Estimation Comparison for Fetuses That Are Suspected to Be Fetal Growth Restricted (FGR) According to Abdominal Circumference (AC)
Video plus image ensemble model and standard fetal biometry estimates mean absolute error (MAE) vs ground truth GA (4-week GA windows) are shown for FGR fetuses (A) and severe FGR fetuses (B). Small fetuses are defined by having an AC below the 10th percentile and are considered very small if the AC is below the 3rd percentile. P values are calculated for each 4-week GA window for the 1-sided test with null hypothesis that the median of MAE differences (model MAE minus standard fetal biometry estimates MAE) is positive. Error bars denote 95% CIs.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Hadlock FP, Harrist RB, Fearneyhough TC, Deter RL, Park SK, Rossavik IK. Use of femur length/abdominal circumference ratio in detecting the macrosomic fetus. Radiology. 1985;154(2):503-505. doi:10.1148/radiology.154.2.3880915 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hadlock FP, Harrist RB, Sharman RS, Deter RL, Park SK. Estimation of fetal weight with the use of head, body, and femur measurements: a prospective study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1985;151(3):333-337. doi:10.1016/0002-9378(85)90298-4 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ravishankar H, Prabhu SM, Vaidya V, Singhal N. Hybrid approach for automatic segmentation of fetal abdomen from ultrasound images using deep learning. 2016 IEEE 13th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI). June 16, 2016. doi:10.1109/ISBI.2016.7493382 - DOI
    1. Kim B, Kim KC, Park Y, Kwon JY, Jang J, Seo JK. Machine-learning-based automatic identification of fetal abdominal circumference from ultrasound images. Physiol Meas. 2018;39(10):105007. doi:10.1088/1361-6579/aae255 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kim HP, Lee SM, Kwon JY, Park Y, Kim KC, Seo JK. Automatic evaluation of fetal head biometry from ultrasound images using machine learning. Physiol Meas. 2019;40(6):065009. doi:10.1088/1361-6579/ab21ac - DOI - PubMed

Publication types