Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35128605›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2022

A systematic comparison of generative models for medical images.

Hristina Uzunova, Matthias Wilms, Nils D Forkert, Heinz Handels, Jan Ehrhardt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. [AI-based applications in medical image computing].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2025
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

Hristina UzunovaArtificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging, Lübeck, Germany. hristina.uzunova@dfki.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8854-3517
Matthias WilmsDepartment of Radiology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
Nils D ForkertDepartment of Radiology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
Heinz HandelsArtificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging, Lübeck, Germany.
Jan EhrhardtArtificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging, Lübeck, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis work aims for a systematic comparison of popular shape and appearance models. Here, two statistical and four deep-learning-based shape and appearance models are compared and evaluated in terms of their expressiveness described by their generalization ability and specificity as well as further properties like input data format, interpretability and latent space distribution and dimension.

methodsClassical shape models and their locality-based extension are considered next to autoencoders, variational autoencoders, diffeomorphic autoencoders and generative adversarial networks. The approaches are evaluated in terms of generalization ability, specificity and likeness depending on the amount of training data. Furthermore, various latent space metrics are presented in order to capture further major characteristics of the models.

resultsThe experimental setup showed that locality statistical shape models yield best results in terms of generalization ability for 2D and 3D shape modeling. However, the deep learning approaches show strongly improved specificity. In the case of simultaneous shape and appearance modeling, the neural networks are able to generate more realistic and diverse appearances. A major drawback of the deep-learning models is, however, their impaired interpretability and ambiguity of the latent space.

conclusionsIt can be concluded that for applications not requiring particularly good specificity, shape modeling can be reliably established with locality-based statistical shape models, especially when it comes to 3D shapes. However, deep learning approaches are more worthwhile in terms of appearance modeling.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalNeural Networks, ComputerHumansComparisonGenerative modelsShape and appearance models

Identifiers

PMID35128605
PMCPMC9206635

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.