PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Teeranan Pokaprakarn AU - Juan C. Prieto AU - Joan T. Price AU - Margaret P. Kasaro AU - Ntazana Sindano AU - Hina R. Shah AU - Marc Peterson AU - Mutinta M. Akapelwa AU - Filson M. Kapilya AU - Yuri V. Sebastião AU - William Goodnight III AU - Elizabeth M. Stringer AU - Bethany L. Freeman AU - Lina M. Montoya AU - Benjamin H. Chi AU - Dwight J. Rouse AU - Stephen R. Cole AU - Bellington Vwalika AU - Michael R. Kosorok AU - Jeffrey S. A. Stringer TI - Deep learning to estimate gestational age from blind ultrasound sweeps of the gravid abdomen AID - 10.1101/2021.11.22.21265452 DP - 2021 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2021.11.22.21265452 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/24/2021.11.22.21265452.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/24/2021.11.22.21265452.full AB - Background Ultrasound is indispensable to gestational age estimation, and thus to quality obstetric care, yet high equipment cost and need for trained sonographers limit its use in low-resource settings.Methods From September 2018 through June 2021, we recruited 4,695 pregnant volunteers in North Carolina and Zambia and obtained blind ultrasound sweeps (cineloops) of the gravid abdomen alongside standard fetal biometry. We trained a neural network to estimate gestational age from the sweeps and, in three test sets, assessed performance of the model and biometry against previously established gestational age.Results In our main test set, model mean absolute error (MAE) was 3.9 days (standard error [SE] 0.12) vs. 4.7 days (SE 0.15) for biometry (difference -0.8 days; 95% CI -1.1, -0.5; p<0.001). Results were similar in North Carolina (difference -0.6 days, 95% CI -0.9, -0.2) and Zambia (−1.0 days, 95% CI -1.5, -0.5). Findings were supported in the test set of women who conceived by in vitro fertilization (model MAE 2.8 days [SE 0.28] vs. 3.6 days [SE 0.53] for biometry; difference -0.8 days, 95% CI -1.7, 0.2), and in the set of women from whom sweeps were collected by untrained users with low-cost, battery-powered devices (model MAE 4.9 days [SE 0.29] vs. 5.4 days [SE 0.28] for biometry; difference -0.6, 95% CI -1.3, 0.1).Conclusions Our model estimated gestational age more accurately from blindly obtained ultrasound sweeps than did trained sonographers performing fetal biometry. These results presage a future where all pregnant people – not just those in rich countries – can access the diagnostic benefits of sonography.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1191684, INV003266). Complementary resources were provided by the University of North Carolina School of Medicine and the US National Institutes of Health, including: T32 HD075731 (JTP), K01 TW010857 (JTP), UL1 TR002489 (MRK), R01 AI157758 (SRC), K24AI120796 (BHC), P30 AI50410 (BHC, SRC, JSAS). The conclusions and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation or US National Institutes of Health. The funders had no role in data collection, data analysis, model building, decision to publish, or preparation of this manuscript.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This work was approved by the University of North Carolina Institutional Review Board, the University of Zambia Biomedical Research Ethics Committee, and the Zambia National Health Research Authority prior to initiation.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors through a third party data sharing mechanism and subject to specific terms around attribution.