ArticleJournal of digital imaging2017
Liver Ultrasound Image Segmentation Using Region-Difference Filters.
Article in Journal of digital imaging, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep Learning Algorithms in the Automatic Segmentation of Liver Lesions in Ultrasound Investigations.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- A new CNN architecture for efficient classification of ultrasound breast tumor images with activation map clustering based prediction validation.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2021Article
- Algorithm guided outlining of 105 pancreatic cancer liver metastases in Ultrasound.Scientific reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this paper, region-difference filters for the segmentation of liver ultrasound (US) images are proposed. Region-difference filters evaluate maximum difference of the average of two regions of the window around the center pixel. Implementing the filters on the whole image gives region-difference image. This image is then converted into binary image and morphologically operated for segmenting the desired lesion from the ultrasound image. The proposed method is compared with the maximum a posteriori-Markov random field (MAP-MRF), Chan-Vese active contour method (CV-ACM), and active contour region-scalable fitting energy (RSFE) methods. MATLAB code available online for the RSFE method is used for comparison whereas MAP-MRF and CV-ACM methods are coded in MATLAB by authors. Since no comparison is available on common database for the performance of the three methods, therefore, performance comparison of the three methods and proposed method was done on liver US images obtained from PGIMER, Chandigarh, India and from online resource. A radiologist blindly analyzed segmentation results of the 4 methods implemented on 56 images and had selected the segmentation result obtained from the proposed method as best for 46 test US images. For the remaining 10 US images, the proposed method performance was very near to the other three segmentation methods. The proposed segmentation method obtained the overall accuracy of 99.32% in comparison to the overall accuracy of 85.9, 98.71, and 68.21% obtained by MAP-MRF, CV-ACM, and RSFE methods, respectively. Computational time taken by the proposed method is 5.05 s compared to the time of 26.44, 24.82, and 28.36 s taken by MAP-MRF, CV-ACM, and RSFE methods, respectively.
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.