Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34254251›Full record

ArticleRadiological physics and technology2021

Effects of sample size and data augmentation on U-Net-based automatic segmentation of various organs.

Takafumi Nemoto, Natsumi Futakami, Etsuo Kunieda, Masamichi Yagi, Atsuya Takeda, Takeshi Akiba, Eride Mutu, Naoyuki Shigematsu

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Radiological physics and technology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence models in detecting osteoporosis using dental images: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Streamlining the annotation process by radiologists of volumetric medical images with few-shot learning.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Takafumi NemotoDepartment of Radiology, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi 35, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan. takatohoku@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5370-0970
Natsumi FutakamiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Shimokasuya 143, Isehara-shi, Kanagawa, 259-1143, Japan.
Etsuo KuniedaDepartment of Radiology, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi 35, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan.
Masamichi YagiPlatform Technical Engineer Division, HPC and AI Business Department, System Platform Solution Unit, Fujitsu Limited, World Trade Center Building, 4-1, Hamamatsucho 2-chome, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 105-6125, Japan.
Atsuya TakedaRadiation Oncology Center, Ofuna Chuo Hospital, Kamakura-shi, Kanagawa, 247-0056, Japan.
Takeshi AkibaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Shimokasuya 143, Isehara-shi, Kanagawa, 259-1143, Japan.
Eride MutuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Shimokasuya 143, Isehara-shi, Kanagawa, 259-1143, Japan.
Naoyuki ShigematsuDepartment of Radiology, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi 35, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan.
Tokai University · JPFujitsu (Japan) · JPGunma Chuo Hospital · JPKeio University · JPKeio University Hospital · JP

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 20K08034
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep learning has demonstrated high efficacy for automatic segmentation in contour delineation, which is crucial in radiation therapy planning. However, the collection, labeling, and management of medical imaging data can be challenging. This study aims to elucidate the effects of sample size and data augmentation on the automatic segmentation of computed tomography images using U-Net, a deep learning method. For the chest and pelvic regions, 232 and 556 cases are evaluated, respectively. We investigate multiple conditions by changing the sum of the training and validation datasets across a broad range of values: 10-200 and 10-500 cases for the chest and pelvic regions, respectively. A U-Net is constructed, and horizontal-flip data augmentation, which produces left and right inverse images resulting in twice the number of images, is compared with no augmentation for each training session. All lung cases and more than 100 prostate, bladder, and rectum cases indicate that adding horizontal-flip data augmentation is almost as effective as doubling the number of cases. The slope of the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) in all organs decreases rapidly until approximately 100 cases, stabilizes after 200 cases, and shows minimal changes as the number of cases is increased further. The DSCs stabilize at a smaller sample size with the incorporation of data augmentation in all organs except the heart. This finding is applicable to the automation of radiation therapy for rare cancers, where large datasets may be difficult to obtain.

Indexed as

ProstateTomography, X-Ray ComputedHumansLungMaleSample SizeThoraxAutomatic segmentationData augmentationRadiation therapySample size

Identifiers

PMID34254251
OpenAlexW3180007843

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.