Loading…

Using Akaike information criterion and minimum mean square error mode in compensating for ultrasonographic errors for estimation of fetal weight by new operators

Abstract Objectives The accuracy of ultrasound (US) measurements is operator dependent. In order to decrease the operator-dependent errors in estimated fetal weight (EFW), a model selection analysis was undertaken to select significant compensation weighting factors on ultrasonographic parameters to...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Taiwanese journal of obstetrics & gynecology 2013-03, Vol.52 (1), p.46-52
Main Authors: Cheng, Yueh-Chin, Chiu, Yu Hsien, Wang, Hsien-Chang, Chang, Fong-Ming, Chung, Kao-Chi, Chang, Chiung-Hsin, Cheng, Kuo-Sheng
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Objectives The accuracy of ultrasound (US) measurements is operator dependent. In order to decrease the operator-dependent errors in estimated fetal weight (EFW), a model selection analysis was undertaken to select significant compensation weighting factors on ultrasonographic parameters to support artificial neural network (ANN), and thus to enhance the accuracy of fetal weight estimation. Materials and Methods In total, 2127 singletons were examined by prenatal US within 3 days before delivery for ANN development, and another 100 cases were selected from new operators for evaluation. First, correlation analysis was used to analyze the differences between the prenatal and postnatal parameters. Second, Akaike information criterion (AIC) was used to determine the number of database partition and optimal weightings for compensating the input parameters of the ANN model. Finally, minimum mean squared error (MMSE) mode was utilized to determine the optimal EFW. Results EFW of the proposed compensation model using AIC and MMSE showed mean absolute percent error of 5.1 ± 3.1% and mean absolute error of 158.9 ± 96.2 g. When comparing the accuracy of EFW, our model using AIC and MMSE was superior to those conventional EFW formulas (all p  
ISSN:1028-4559
DOI:10.1016/j.tjog.2013.01.008