arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2611.06791

A Frame-Level View and Image-Quality Annotation Tool for Fetal Echocardiography: Comparison with Spreadsheet Annotation

Mohamed Azzam·Ziyang Xu·Quinlan Couch·Zoe Keese·Andrea Cadlo·Christine Sedze-DeWolf·Micaiah Uhrmacher·Madelyn Graff·Catherine Fox·Lauren Vatter·Paige Jeffryes·Jason Christensen·Neil Hamill·Shibiao Wan·Ling Li·Jieqiong Wang
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Objective: To develop the Cardiologist Annotation Tool (CAT) for frame-level cardiac view and image-quality annotation in fetal echocardiography and compare it with spreadsheet-based annotation. Methods: CAT provides cine playback, frame navigation, and keyboard-based labeling without manual frame-range entry. Experts annotated 25 studies using both methods, and spreadsheet annotations were audited for predefined data-entry errors. In a randomized crossover study, six medical students annotated two normal studies, one with each method, against an expert reference. Results: Among 1,746 spreadsheet-annotated files, 6.2% contained major or critical data-entry errors, more frequently in congenital heart disease than normal studies (10.9% vs 3.4%). CAT yielded more annotated view segments per clip (3.6 vs 1.5). Rates of labeled and correctly labeled frames per minute were 1.77 and 1.68 times those with spreadsheets, respectively (both P = 0.031), with gains in all six students. No detectable difference in view-label accuracy was observed. Conclusion: CAT eliminates manual frame-range entry and enables finer-grained, structured annotation of fetal echocardiography, providing a practical approach to preparing datasets for AI research.

Explore related subjects

cs.HCeess.IV

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Mohamed Azzam, Ziyang Xu, Quinlan Couch, Zoe Keese, Andrea Cadlo, Christine Sedze-DeWolf, Micaiah Uhrmacher, Madelyn Graff, Catherine Fox, Lauren Vatter, Paige Jeffryes, Jason Christensen, Neil Hamill, Shibiao Wan, Ling Li, Jieqiong Wang. 2026-11-04. A Frame-Level View and Image-Quality Annotation Tool for Fetal Echocardiography: Comparison with Spreadsheet Annotation. https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.06791

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

HarmonICA: Quasi-Time-Invariant ICA for Motor Unit Decomposition during Dynamic Contractions

Decomposing surface electromyography (EMG) into the spike trains of individual motor neurons is a long-standing inverse problem and a key step toward motor-neuron-driven neural interfaces such as prosthetics and exoskeletons. The standard approach, independent component analysis (ICA) of the multichannel signal, assumes that the mixing from neurons to electrodes is stationary in time. This assumption fails during movement, when volume-conductor deformation makes the mixing time-varying, and current decomposition algorithms are correspondingly restricted to isometric contractions. We introduce HarmonICA, a quasi-time-invariant ICA formulation in which a static linear separator is preceded by a learned, low-rank, time-varying invertible transformation. The separator is trained with an independence loss on the uncompensated projection, and the transformation with a stationarity loss on the recovered source. Gradients are not shared between the two, so source extraction remains a classical linear-ICA problem while non-stationary distortion is absorbed by the transformation. The closed-form inverse of the transformation enables per-spike subtraction with a time-varying template during sequential peel-off. On a public simulated benchmark of dynamic high-density EMG with ground-truth spike trains, the method outperforms five adaptive ICA baselines at every recall threshold, recovering more units at a higher accuracy.

cs.HC↗
arXiv2026

A State-of-the-Art Review of Computational Models for Analyzing Longitudinal Wearable Sensor Data in Healthcare

Wearable devices are increasingly used as tools for biomedical research, as the continuous stream of behavioral and physiological data they collect can provide insights about our health in everyday contexts. Long-term tracking, defined in the timescale of months of year, can provide insights of patterns and changes as indicators of health changes. These insights can make medicine and healthcare more predictive, preventive, personalized, and participative (The 4P's). However, the challenges in modeling, understanding and processing longitudinal data are a significant barrier to their adoption in research studies and clinical settings. In this paper, we review and discuss three models used to make sense of longitudinal data: routines, rhythms and stability metrics. We present the challenges associated with the processing and analysis of longitudinal wearable sensor data, with a special focus on how to handle the different temporal dynamics at various granularities. We then discuss current limitations and identify directions for future work. This review is essential to the advancement of computational modeling and analysis of longitudinal sensor data for pervasive healthcare.

cs.HC↗
arXiv2026

Does Explanation Correctness Matter? Linking Computational XAI Evaluation to Human Understanding

Explainable AI (XAI) methods are commonly evaluated using functional correctness metrics, also called faithfulness or fidelity, which estimate how closely an explanation reflects the model's reasoning. Higher correctness is assumed to produce better human understanding, but this link has not been tested with controlled levels. We conducted a user study (N=200) that manipulated explanation correctness at four levels (100%, 85%, 70%, 55%) in a synthetic time series classification task where participants could not rely on domain knowledge or visual intuition. Explanations were constructed to resemble feature attributions, with correctness defined against a known ground truth rather than estimated from a trained model. Participants predicted a simulated AI's decisions from these explanations (forward simulation), and we used their forward simulation accuracy as a proxy for understanding. Correctness affected forward simulation accuracy, but not at every level: accuracy dropped at 70% and 55% relative to 100%, with no further reduction below 70% and no conclusive difference between 85% and 100%. Lower correctness reduced how many participants predicted accurately rather than lowering accuracy uniformly, and even with fully correct explanations, only a subset of participants predicted well above chance. In exploratory analyses, some participants predicted decisions accurately but described the wrong pattern when asked what the AI used, and self-reported ratings correlated with forward simulation accuracy only when explanations were fully correct. These findings suggest that, for feature-attribution-style explanations, not all differences in functional correctness translate to differences in human understanding, highlighting the need to validate functional metrics against human outcomes.

cs.HC↗