ArticleJournal of digital imaging2014
Pectoral muscle detection in mammograms using local statistical features.
Article in Journal of digital imaging, 2014. 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.
- Towards Automated Semantic Segmentation in Mammography Images for Enhanced Clinical Applications.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2025Article
- Automatic Pectoral Muscle Region Segmentation in Mammograms Using Genetic Algorithm and Morphological Selection.Journal of digital imaging · 2018Article
- Detection and Segmentation of Pectoral Muscle on MLO-View Mammogram Using Enhancement Filter.Journal of medical systems · 2017Article
- Automatic Detection of Pectoral Muscle Region for Computer-Aided Diagnosis Using MIAS Mammograms.BioMed research international · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mammography is a primary imaging method for breast cancer diagnosis. It is an important issue to accurately identify and separate pectoral muscles (PM) from breast tissues. Hough-transform-based methods are commonly adopted for PM detection. But their performances are susceptible when PM edges cannot be depicted by straight lines. In this study, we present a new pectoral muscle identification algorithm which utilizes statistical features of pixel responses. First, the Anderson-Darling goodness-of-fit test is used to extract a feature image by assuming non-Gaussianity for PM boundaries. Second, a global weighting scheme based on the location of PM was applied onto the feature image to suppress non-PM regions. From the weighted image, a preliminary set of pectoral muscles boundary components is detected via row-wise peak detection. An iterative procedure based on the edge continuity and orientation is used to determine the final PM boundary. Our results on a public mammogram database were assessed using four performance metrics: the false positive rate, the false negative rate, the Hausdorff distance, and the average distance. Compared to previous studies, our method demonstrates the state-of-art performance in terms of four measures.
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.