ArticlePloS one2020
ChronoMID-Cross-modal neural networks for 3-D temporal medical imaging data.
Article in PloS one, 2020. 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.
- Demystifying machine learning approaches in digital bone imaging using microCT and HRpQCT.Bone reports · 2026Review
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
ChronoMID-neural networks for temporally-varying, hence Chrono, Medical Imaging Data-makes the novel application of cross-modal convolutional neural networks (X-CNNs) to the medical domain. In this paper, we present multiple approaches for incorporating temporal information into X-CNNs and compare their performance in a case study on the classification of abnormal bone remodelling in mice. Previous work developing medical models has predominantly focused on either spatial or temporal aspects, but rarely both. Our models seek to unify these complementary sources of information and derive insights in a bottom-up, data-driven approach. As with many medical datasets, the case study herein exhibits deep rather than wide data; we apply various techniques, including extensive regularisation, to account for this. After training on a balanced set of approximately 70000 images, two of the models-those using difference maps from known reference points-outperformed a state-of-the-art convolutional neural network baseline by over 30pp (> 99% vs. 68.26%) on an unseen, balanced validation set comprising around 20000 images. These models are expected to perform well with sparse data sets based on both previous findings with X-CNNs and the representations of time used, which permit arbitrarily large and irregular gaps between data points. Our results highlight the importance of identifying a suitable description of time for a problem domain, as unsuitable descriptors may not only fail to improve a model, they may in fact confound it.
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.