Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22606671›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical signals and sensors2011

A New Markov Random Field Segmentation Method for Breast Lesion Segmentation in MR images.

Reza Azmi, Narges Norozi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical signals and sensors, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Intra-abdominal fat: Comparison of computed tomography fat segmentation and bioimpedance spectroscopy.Malawi medical journal : the journal of Medical Association of Malawi · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Reza AzmiFaculty of Engineering and Technology Alzahra University Tehran, Iran.
Narges Norozi

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast cancer is a major public health problem for women in the Iran and many other parts of the world. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) plays a pivotal role in breast cancer care, including detection, diagnosis, and treatment monitoring. But segmentation of these images which is seriously affected by intensity inhomogeneities created by radio-frequency coils is a challenging task. Markov Random Field (MRF) is used widely in medical image segmentation especially in MR images. It is because this method can model intensity inhomogeneities occurring in these images. But this method has two critical weaknesses: Computational complexity and sensitivity of the results to the models parameters. To overcome these problems, in this paper, we present Improved-Markov Random Field (I-MRF) method for breast lesion segmentation in MR images. Unlike the conventional MRF, in the proposed approach, we don't use the Iterative Conditional Mode (ICM) method or Simulated Annealing (SA) for class membership estimation of each pixel (lesion and non-lesion). The prior distribution of the class membership is modeled as a ratio of two conditional probability distributions in a neighborhood which is defined for each pixel: probability distribution of similar pixels and non-similar ones. Since our proposed approach don't use an iterative method for maximizing the posterior probability, above mentioned problems are solved. Experimental results show that performance of segmentation in this approach is higher than conventional MRF in terms of accuracy, precision, and Computational complexity.

Indexed as

Breast Lesions segmentationMarkov Random FieldsMR imagingTextural Features

Identifiers

PMID22606671
PMCPMC3347230

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.