ArticlePhysica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics (AIFB)2021
Automatic lung segmentation in COVID-19 patients: Impact on quantitative computed tomography analysis.
Article in Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics (AIFB), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Automated quantitative chest CT for mortality prediction in COVID-19 patients in a resource-limited emergency setting in Gaza: a retrospective study using LungCTAnalyzer.Emergency radiology · 2025Article
- Optimising strategies for artificial intelligence-assisted classification of viral pneumonias on CT imaging: a comparative study of selective and default approaches.Polish journal of radiology · 2025Article
- Quantitative Computed Tomography and Response to Pronation in COVID-19 ARDS.Respiratory care · 2024Observational
- A multicenter evaluation of a deep learning software (LungQuant) for lung parenchyma characterization in COVID-19 pneumonia.European radiology experimental · 2023Article
- Quantitative Imaging Metrics for the Assessment of Pulmonary Pathophysiology: An Official American Thoracic Society and Fleischner Society Joint Workshop Report.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2023Article
- Artificial intelligence for differentiating COVID-19 from other viral pneumonias on CT: comparative analysis of different models based on quantitative and radiomic approaches.European radiology experimental · 2023Article
- A deep learning-based application for COVID-19 diagnosis on CT: The Imaging COVID-19 AI initiative.PloS one · 2023Article
- Diagnostic Performance in Differentiating COVID-19 from Other Viral Pneumonias on CT Imaging: Multi-Reader Analysis Compared with an Artificial Intelligence-Based Model.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2022Article
- Two-dimensional reciprocal cross entropy multi-threshold combined with improved firefly algorithm for lung parenchyma segmentation of COVID-19 CT image.Biomedical signal processing and control · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess the impact of lung segmentation accuracy in an automatic pipeline for quantitative analysis of CT images.
methodsFour different platforms for automatic lung segmentation based on convolutional neural network (CNN), region-growing technique and atlas-based algorithm were considered. The platforms were tested using CT images of 55 COVID-19 patients with severe lung impairment. Four radiologists assessed the segmentations using a 5-point qualitative score (QS). For each CT series, a manually revised reference segmentation (RS) was obtained. Histogram-based quantitative metrics (QM) were calculated from CT histogram using lung segmentationsfrom all platforms and RS. Dice index (DI) and differences of QMs (ΔQMs) were calculated between RS and other segmentations.
resultsHighest QS and lower ΔQMs values were associated to the CNN algorithm. However, only 45% CNN segmentations were judged to need no or only minimal corrections, and in only 17 cases (31%), automatic segmentations provided RS without manual corrections. Median values of the DI for the four algorithms ranged from 0.993 to 0.904. Significant differences for all QMs calculated between automatic segmentations and RS were found both when data were pooled together and stratified according to QS, indicating a relationship between qualitative and quantitative measurements. The most unstable QM was the histogram 90th percentile, with median ΔQMs values ranging from 10HU and 158HU between different algorithms.
conclusionsNone of tested algorithms provided fully reliable segmentation. Segmentation accuracy impacts differently on different quantitative metrics, and each of them should be individually evaluated according to the purpose of subsequent analyses.
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.