ArticleComputerized medical imaging and graphics : the official journal of the Computerized Medical Imaging Society2010
A unified set of analysis tools for uterine cervix image segmentation.
Article in Computerized medical imaging and graphics : the official journal of the Computerized Medical Imaging Society, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing Inter-Annotator Agreement for Medical Image Segmentation.IEEE access : practical innovations, open solutions · 2023Article
- Cross-Dataset Evaluation of Deep Learning Networks for Uterine Cervix Segmentation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Development of an expert system as a diagnostic support of cervical cancer in atypical glandular cells, based on fuzzy logics and image interpretation.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2013Review
- A fusion-based approach for uterine cervical cancer histology image classification.Computerized medical imaging and graphics : the official journal of the Computerized Medical Imaging SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Segmentation is a fundamental component of many medical image-processing applications, and it has long been recognized as a challenging problem. In this paper, we report our research and development efforts on analyzing and extracting clinically meaningful regions from uterine cervix images in a large database created for the study of cervical cancer. In addition to proposing new algorithms, we also focus on developing open source tools which are in synchrony with the research objectives. These efforts have resulted in three Web-accessible tools which address three important and interrelated sub-topics in medical image segmentation, respectively: the Boundary Marking Tool (BMT), Cervigram Segmentation Tool (CST), and Multi-Observer Segmentation Evaluation System (MOSES). The BMT is for manual segmentation, typically to collect "ground truth" image regions from medical experts. The CST is for automatic segmentation, and MOSES is for segmentation evaluation. These tools are designed to be a unified set in which data can be conveniently exchanged. They have value not only for improving the reliability and accuracy of algorithms of uterine cervix image segmentation, but also promoting collaboration between biomedical experts and engineers which are crucial to medical image-processing applications. Although the CST is designed for the unique characteristics of cervigrams, the BMT and MOSES are very general and extensible, and can be easily adapted to other biomedical image collections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.