Bastian Rieck

Dr. Bastian Rieck

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

15Years (2012-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
9 March 2020 in Nature Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
SHStephanie L. Hyland
Stephanie L. Hyland
MFMartin Faltys
Martin Faltys
MHMatthias Hüser
Matthias Hüser
XLXinrui Lyu
Xinrui Lyu
TGThomas Gumbsch
Thomas Gumbsch
TMTobias M. Merz
Tobias M. Merz

10 January 2022 in Nature Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
CWCaroline Weis
Caroline Weis
ACAline Cuénod
Aline Cuénod
BRBastian Rieck
Bastian Rieck
ODOlivier Dubuis
Olivier Dubuis
SGSusanne Graf
Susanne Graf
AEAdrian Egli
Adrian Egli

26 May 2021 in Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
FHFelix Hensel
Felix Hensel
MMMichael Moor
Michael Moor
BRBastian Rieck
Bastian Rieck
The last decade saw an enormous boost in the field of computational topology: methods and concepts from algebraic and differential topology, formerly confined to the realm of pure mathematics, have demonstrated their utility in numerous areas such as computational biology personalised medicine, and time-dependent data analysis, to name a few. The newly-emerging domain comprising topology-based techniques is often referred to as topological data analysis (TDA). Next to their applications in the aforementioned areas, TDA methods have also proven to be effective in supporting, enhancing, and augmenting both classical machine learning and deep learning models. In this paper, we review the state of the art of a nascent field we refer to as “topological machine learning,” i.e., the successful symbiosis of topology-based methods and machine learning algorithms, such as deep neural networks. We identify common threads, current applications, and future challenges.

12 January 2021 in Applied Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JBJannis Born
Jannis Born
NWNina Wiedemann
Nina Wiedemann
MCManuel Cossio
Manuel Cossio
CBCharlotte Buhre-Wördemann
Charlotte Buhre-Wördemann
GBGabriel Brändle
Gabriel Brändle
KBKarsten Borgwardt
Karsten Borgwardt
Care during the COVID-19 pandemic hinges upon the existence of fast, safe, and highly sensitive diagnostic tools. Considering significant practical advantages of lung ultrasound (LUS) over other imaging techniques, but difficulties for doctors in pattern recognition, we aim to leverage machine learning toward guiding diagnosis from LUS. We release the largest publicly available LUS dataset for COVID-19 consisting of 202 videos from four classes (COVID-19, bacterial pneumonia, non-COVID-19 viral pneumonia and healthy controls). On this dataset, we perform an in-depth study of the value of deep learning methods for the differential diagnosis of lung pathologies. We propose a frame-based model that correctly distinguishes COVID-19 LUS videos from healthy and bacterial pneumonia data with a sensitivity of 0.90±0.08 and a specificity of 0.96±0.04. To investigate the utility of the proposed method, we employ interpretability methods for the spatio-temporal localization of pulmonary biomarkers, which are deemed useful for human-in-the-loop scenarios in a blinded study with medical experts. Aiming for robustness, we perform uncertainty estimation and demonstrate the model to recognize low-confidence situations which also improves performance. Lastly, we validated our model on an independent test dataset and report promising performance (sensitivity 0.806, specificity 0.962). The provided dataset facilitates the validation of related methodology in the community and the proposed framework might aid the development of a fast, accessible screening method for pulmonary diseases. Dataset and all code are publicly available at: https://github.com/BorgwardtLab/covid19_ultrasound.

11 August 2023 in eClinicalMedicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
MMMichael Moor
Michael Moor
NBNicolas Bennett
Nicolas Bennett
DPDrago Plečko
Drago Plečko
MHMax Horn
Max Horn
BRBastian Rieck
Bastian Rieck
KBKarsten Borgwardt
Karsten Borgwardt
When sepsis is detected, organ damage may have progressed to irreversible stages, leading to poor prognosis. The use of machine learning for predicting sepsis early has shown promise, however international validations are missing. This was a retrospective, observational, multi-centre cohort study. We developed and externally validated a deep learning system for the prediction of sepsis in the intensive care unit (ICU). Our analysis represents the first international, multi-centre in-ICU cohort study for sepsis prediction using deep learning to our knowledge. Our dataset contains 136,478 unique ICU admissions, representing a refined and harmonised subset of four large ICU databases comprising data collected from ICUs in the US, the Netherlands, and Switzerland between 2001 and 2016. Using the international consensus definition Sepsis-3, we derived hourly-resolved sepsis annotations, amounting to 25,694 (18.8%) patient stays with sepsis. We compared our approach to clinical baselines as well as machine learning baselines and performed an extensive internal and external statistical validation within and across databases, reporting area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUC). Averaged over sites, our model was able to predict sepsis with an AUC of 0.846 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.841–0.852) on a held-out validation cohort internal to each site, and an AUC of 0.761 (95% CI, 0.746–0.770) when validating externally across sites. Given access to a small fine-tuning set (10% per site), the transfer to target sites was improved to an AUC of 0.807 (95% CI, 0.801–0.813). Our model raised 1.4 false alerts per true alert and detected 80% of the septic patients 3.7 h (95% CI, 3.0–4.3) prior to the onset of sepsis, opening a vital window for intervention. By monitoring clinical and laboratory measurements in a retrospective simulation of a real-time prediction scenario, a deep learning system for the detection of sepsis generalised to previously unseen ICU cohorts, internationally. This study was funded by the Personalized Health and Related Technologies (PHRT) strategic focus area of the ETH domain.

1 September 2020 in Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
CJCatherine J. Jutzeler
Catherine J. Jutzeler
LBLucie Bourguignon
Lucie Bourguignon
CWCaroline V. Weis
Caroline V. Weis
BTBobo Tong
Bobo Tong
CWCyrus Wong
Cyrus Wong
MWMatthias Walter
Matthias Walter
Since December 2019, a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has triggered a world-wide pandemic with an enormous medical and societal-economic toll. Thus, our aim was to gather all available information regarding comorbidities, clinical signs and symptoms, outcomes, laboratory findings, imaging features, and treatments in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). EMBASE, PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for studies published in any language between December 1st, 2019 and March 28th, 2020. Original studies were included if the exposure of interest was an infection with SARS-CoV-2 or confirmed COVID-19. The primary outcome was the risk ratio of comorbidities, clinical signs and symptoms, laboratory findings, imaging features, treatments, outcomes, and complications associated with COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. We performed random-effects pairwise meta-analyses for proportions and relative risks, I2, T2, and Cochrane Q, sensitivity analyses, and assessed publication bias. 148 studies met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review and meta-analysis with 12′149 patients (5′739 female) and a median age of 47.0 [35.0–64.6] years. 617 patients died from COVID-19 and its complication. 297 patients were reported as asymptomatic. Older age (SMD: 1.25 [0.78–1.72]; p < 0.001), being male (RR = 1.32 [1.13–1.54], p = 0.005) and pre-existing comorbidity (RR = 1.69 [1.48–1.94]; p < 0.001) were identified as risk factors of in-hospital mortality. The heterogeneity between studies varied substantially (I2; range: 1.5–98.2%). Publication bias was only found in eight studies (Egger's test: p < 0.05). Our meta-analyses revealed important risk factors that are associated with severity and mortality of COVID-19.