Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30007253›Full record

ArticleMedical image analysis2018

Weakly-supervised convolutional neural networks for multimodal image registration.

Yipeng Hu, Marc Modat, Eli Gibson, Wenqi Li, Nooshin Ghavami, Ester Bonmati, Guotai Wang, Steven Bandula, Caroline M Moore, Mark Emberton and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical image analysis, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 120 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
120citing 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

120 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. GuidedMorph: Two-Stage Deformable Registration for Breast MRI.IEEE journal of biomedical and health informatics · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. IR-GPT: AI Foundation Models to Optimize Interventional Radiology.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2025
    Review
  20. Article

60 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

14 authors.

Yipeng HuCentre for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, UK; Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. Electronic address: yipeng.hu@ucl.ac.uk.
Marc ModatCentre for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, UK; Wellcome / EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
Eli GibsonCentre for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, UK.
Wenqi LiCentre for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, UK; Wellcome / EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
Nooshin GhavamiCentre for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, UK.
Ester BonmatiCentre for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, UK.
Guotai WangCentre for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, UK; Wellcome / EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
Steven BandulaCentre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK.
Caroline M MooreDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Mark EmbertonDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Sébastien OurselinCentre for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, UK; Wellcome / EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
J Alison NobleInstitute of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Dean C BarrattCentre for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, UK; Wellcome / EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
Tom VercauterenCentre for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, UK; Wellcome / EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London, London, UK.

Funding

Cancer Research UK C28070/A19985Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 203145Z/16/ZWellcome Trust WT101957
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of the fundamental challenges in supervised learning for multimodal image registration is the lack of ground-truth for voxel-level spatial correspondence. This work describes a method to infer voxel-level transformation from higher-level correspondence information contained in anatomical labels. We argue that such labels are more reliable and practical to obtain for reference sets of image pairs than voxel-level correspondence. Typical anatomical labels of interest may include solid organs, vessels, ducts, structure boundaries and other subject-specific ad hoc landmarks. The proposed end-to-end convolutional neural network approach aims to predict displacement fields to align multiple labelled corresponding structures for individual image pairs during the training, while only unlabelled image pairs are used as the network input for inference. We highlight the versatility of the proposed strategy, for training, utilising diverse types of anatomical labels, which need not to be identifiable over all training image pairs. At inference, the resulting 3D deformable image registration algorithm runs in real-time and is fully-automated without requiring any anatomical labels or initialisation. Several network architecture variants are compared for registering T2-weighted magnetic resonance images and 3D transrectal ultrasound images from prostate cancer patients. A median target registration error of 3.6 mm on landmark centroids and a median Dice of 0.87 on prostate glands are achieved from cross-validation experiments, in which 108 pairs of multimodal images from 76 patients were tested with high-quality anatomical labels.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeural Networks, ComputerUltrasonographyAnatomic LandmarksHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalMaleProstateProstatic NeoplasmsConvolutional neural networkImage-guided interventionMedical image registrationProstate cancerWeakly-supervised learning

Identifiers

PMID30007253
PMCPMC6742510

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.