ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2013
Evaluation of 4 three-dimensional representation algorithms in capsule endoscopy images.
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Capsule Endoscopy: Pitfalls and Approaches to Overcome.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Video capsule endoscopy: pushing the boundaries with software technology.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2021Review
- Article
- Overview of technical solutions and assessment of clinical usefulness of capsule endoscopy.Biomedical engineering online · 2015Review
- Small bowel capsule endoscopy: Where are we after almost 15 years of use?World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2015Review
- Capsule endoscopy: Present status and future expectation.World journal of gastroenterology · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate the three-dimensional (3-D) representation performance of 4 publicly available Shape-from-Shading (SfS) algorithms in small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE).
methodsSfS techniques recover the shape of objects using the gradual variation of shading. There are 4 publicly available SfS algorithms. To the best of our knowledge, no comparative study with images obtained during clinical SBCE has been performed to date. Three experienced reviewers were asked to evaluate 54 two-dimensional (2-D) images (categories: protrusion/inflammation/vascular) transformed to 3-D by the aforementioned SfS 3-D algorithms. The best algorithm was selected and inter-rater agreement was calculated.
resultsFour publicly available SfS algorithms were compared. Tsai's SfS algorithm outperformed the rest (selected as best performing in 45/54 SBCE images), followed by Ciuti's algorithm (best performing in 7/54 images) and Torreão's (in 1/54 images). In 26/54 images; Tsai's algorithm was unanimously selected as the best performing 3-D representation SfS software. Tsai's 3-D algorithm superiority was independent of lesion category (protrusion/inflammatory/vascular; P = 0.678) and/or CE system used to obtain the 2-D images (MiroCam/PillCam; P = 0.558). Lastly, the inter-observer agreement was good (kappa = 0.55).
conclusion3-D representation software offers a plausible alternative for 3-D representation of conventional capsule endoscopy images (until optics technology matures enough to allow hardware enabled-"real" 3-D reconstruction of the gastrointestinal tract).
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.