Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32974873›Full record

ArticleNeuroinformatics2021

Deep Learning Model for the Automated Detection and Histopathological Prediction of Meningioma.

Hua Zhang, Jiajie Mo, Han Jiang, Zhuyun Li, Wenhan Hu, Chao Zhang, Yao Wang, Xiu Wang, Chang Liu, Baotian Zhao and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neuroinformatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Applications and Integration of Radiomics for Skull Base Oncology.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

12 authors.

Hua Zhang *Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Jiajie Mo *Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Han JiangOpenBayes Joint Laboratory For Artificial Intelligence, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China.
Zhuyun LiOpenBayes Joint Laboratory For Artificial Intelligence, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China.
Wenhan HuDepartment of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Chao ZhangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Yao WangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Xiu WangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Chang LiuDepartment of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Baotian ZhaoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Jianguo ZhangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China. zjguo73@126.com.
Kai ZhangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China. zhangkai62035@sina.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The volumetric assessment and accurate grading of meningiomas before surgery are highly relevant for therapy planning and prognosis prediction. This study was to design a deep learning algorithm and evaluate the performance in detecting meningioma lesions and grade classification. In total, 5088 patients with histopathologically confirmed meningioma were retrospectively included. The pyramid scene parsing network (PSPNet) was trained to automatically detect and delineate the meningiomas. The results were compared to manual segmentations by evaluating the mean intersection over union (mIoU). The performance of grade classification was evaluated by accuracy. For the automated detection and segmentation of meningiomas, the mean pixel accuracy, tumor accuracy, background accuracy and mIoU were 99.68%, 81.36%, 99.88% and 81.36% for all patients; 99.52%, 84.86%, 99.93% and 84.86% for grade I meningiomas; 99.57%, 80.11%, 99.92% and 80.12% for grade II meningiomas; and 99.75%, 78.40%, 99.99% and 78.40% for grade III meningiomas, respectively. For grade classification, the accuracy values of the training and test datasets were 99.93% and 81.52% for all patients; 99.98% and 98.51% for grade I meningiomas; 99.91% and 66.67% for grade II meningiomas; and 99.88% and 73.91% for grade III meningiomas, respectively. The automated detection, segmentation and grade classification of meningiomas based on deep learning were accurate and reliable and may improve the monitoring and treatment of this frequently occurring tumor entity. Furthermore, the method could function as a useful tool for preassessment and preselection for radiologists, offering auxiliary information for clinical decision making in presurgical evaluation.

Indexed as

Deep LearningMeningeal NeoplasmsMeningiomaChildHumansNeoplasm GradingRetrospective StudiesDeep learningDelineationGrade classificationMeningiomasPSPNet

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.