ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Recognition Rate Advancement and Data Error Improvement of Pathology Cutting with H-DenseUNet for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Image.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. 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.
- Clinically applicable optimized periprosthetic joint infection diagnosis via AI based pathology.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Due to the fact that previous studies have rarely investigated the recognition rate discrepancy and pathology data error when applied to different databases, the purpose of this study is to investigate the improvement of recognition rate via deep learning-based liver lesion segmentation with the incorporation of hospital data. The recognition model used in this study is H-DenseUNet, which is applied to the segmentation of the liver and lesions, and a mixture of 2D/3D Hybrid-DenseUNet is used to reduce the recognition time and system memory requirements. Differences in recognition results were determined by comparing the training files of the standard LiTS competition data set with the training set after mixing in an additional 30 patients. The average error value of 9.6% was obtained by comparing the data discrepancy between the actual pathology data and the pathology data after the analysis of the identified images imported from Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital. The average error rate of the recognition output after mixing the LiTS database with hospital data for training was 1%. In the recognition part, the Dice coefficient was 0.52 after training 50 epochs using the standard LiTS database, while the Dice coefficient was increased to 0.61 after adding 30 hospital data to the training. After importing 3D Slice and ITK-Snap software, a 3D image of the lesion and liver segmentation can be developed. It is hoped that this method could be used to stimulate more research in addition to the general public standard database in the future, as well as to study the applicability of hospital data and improve the generality of the database.
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.