ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2018
Neutrosophic segmentation of breast lesions for dedicated breast computed tomography.
Article in Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
Abstract
We proposed the neutrosophic approach for segmenting breast lesions in breast computed tomography (bCT) images. The neutrosophic set considers the nature and properties of neutrality (or indeterminacy). We considered the image noise as an indeterminate component while treating the breast lesion and other breast areas as true and false components. We iteratively smoothed and contrast-enhanced the image to reduce the noise level of the true set. We then applied one existing algorithm for bCT images, the RGI segmentation, on the resulting noise-reduced image to segment the breast lesions. We compared the segmentation performance of the proposed method (named as NS-RGI) to that of the regular RGI segmentation. We used 122 breast lesions (44 benign and 78 malignant) of 111 noncontrast enhanced bCT cases. We measured the segmentation performances of the NS-RGI and the RGI using the Dice coefficient. The average Dice values of the NS-RGI and RGI were 0.82 and 0.80, respectively, and their difference was statistically significant ([Formula: see text]). We conducted a subsequent feature analysis on the resulting segmentations. The classifier performance for the NS-RGI ([Formula: see text]) improved over that of the RGI ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]).
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.