ArticlePloS one2021
Deep generative models for automated muscle segmentation in computed tomography scanning.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy of automated segmentation of gluteus and paraspinal muscles in patients with hip osteoarthritis using TotalSegmentator in 3Dslicer.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2026Article
- A two-stage deep-learning model using MobileNetV2 and U-Net for CT-based muscle volume assessment in total hip arthroplasty.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Progress in machine learning-assisted medical imaging for osteoarthritis and osteoporosis diagnosis: a narrative review.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Review
- Automated analysis of paraspinal muscles: segmentation and multi-parameter quantification in lumbar CT using convolutional neural network.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence and robotic technologies redefining precision and personalization in orthopedic surgery: a narrative review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Orthopedic Surgery: Current Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions.MedComm · 2025Review
- Deep Learning Technique for Automatic Segmentation of Proximal Hip Musculoskeletal Tissues From CT Scan Images: A MrOS Study.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence demonstrates potential to enhance orthopaedic imaging across multiple modalities: A systematic review.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Review
- Validation of musculoskeletal segmentation model with uncertainty estimation for bone and muscle assessment in hip-to-knee clinical CT images.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Accelerated muscle mass estimation from CT images through transfer learning.BMC medical imaging · 2024Article
- UDBRNet: A novel uncertainty driven boundary refined network for organ at risk segmentation.PloS one · 2024Article
- Automatic foot ulcer segmentation using conditional generative adversarial network (AFSegGAN): A wound management system.PLOS digital health · 2023Article
- Deep Learning-Based Medical Images Segmentation of Musculoskeletal Anatomical Structures: A Survey of Bottlenecks and Strategies.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- AUE-Net: Automated Generation of Ultrasound Elastography Using Generative Adversarial Network.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate gluteus medius (GMd) volume evaluation may aid in the analysis of muscular atrophy states and help gain an improved understanding of patient recovery via rehabilitation. However, the segmentation of muscle regions in GMd images for cubic muscle volume assessment is time-consuming and labor-intensive. This study automated GMd-region segmentation from the computed tomography (CT) images of patients diagnosed with hip osteoarthritis using deep learning and evaluated the segmentation accuracy. To this end, 5250 augmented pairs of training data were obtained from five participants, and a conditional generative adversarial network was used to identify the relationships between the image pairs. Using the preserved test datasets, the results of automatic segmentation with the trained deep learning model were compared to those of manual segmentation in terms of the dice similarity coefficient (DSC), volume similarity (VS), and shape similarity (MS). As observed, the average DSC values for automatic and manual segmentations were 0.748 and 0.812, respectively, with a significant difference (p < 0.0001); the average VS values were 0.247 and 0.203, respectively, with no significant difference (p = 0.069); and the average MS values were 1.394 and 1.156, respectively, with no significant difference (p = 0.308). The GMd volumes obtained by automatic and manual segmentation were 246.2 cm3 and 282.9 cm3, respectively. The noninferiority of the DSC obtained by automatic segmentation was verified against that obtained by manual segmentation. Accordingly, the proposed GAN-based automatic GMd-segmentation technique is confirmed to be noninferior to manual segmentation. Therefore, the findings of this research confirm that the proposed method not only reduces time and effort but also facilitates accurate assessment of the cubic muscle volume.
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.