ArticleFrontiers in neurology2022
Convolutional Neural Networks Enable Robust Automatic Segmentation of the Rat Hippocampus in MRI After Traumatic Brain Injury.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contusions bias cortical thickness estimates after traumatic brain injury: A TRACK-TBI study.NeuroImage. Clinical · 2026Article
- Deep Learning and Atlas-Based MRI Segmentation Enable Longitudinal Characterization of Healthy Mouse Brain.Journal of imaging · 2025Article
- Deep learning-based automated lesion segmentation on mouse stroke magnetic resonance images.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Automatic Cerebral Hemisphere Segmentation in Rat MRI with Ischemic Lesions via Attention-based Convolutional Neural Networks.Neuroinformatics · 2023Article
- Acute Hippocampal Damage as a Prognostic Biomarker for Cognitive Decline but Not for Epileptogenesis after Experimental Traumatic Brain Injury.Biomedicines · 2022Article
- MRI-Guided Electrode Implantation for Chronic Intracerebral Recordings in a Rat Model of Post-Traumatic Epilepsy-Challenges and Gains.Biomedicines · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Registration-based methods are commonly used in the automatic segmentation of magnetic resonance (MR) brain images. However, these methods are not robust to the presence of gross pathologies that can alter the brain anatomy and affect the alignment of the atlas image with the target image. In this work, we develop a robust algorithm, MU-Net-R, for automatic segmentation of the normal and injured rat hippocampus based on an ensemble of U-net-like Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs). MU-Net-R was trained on manually segmented MR images of sham-operated rats and rats with traumatic brain injury (TBI) by lateral fluid percussion. The performance of MU-Net-R was quantitatively compared with methods based on single and multi-atlas registration using MR images from two large preclinical cohorts. Automatic segmentations using MU-Net-R and multi-atlas registration were of excellent quality, achieving cross-validated Dice scores above 0.90 despite the presence of brain lesions, atrophy, and ventricular enlargement. In contrast, the performance of single-atlas segmentation was unsatisfactory (cross-validated Dice scores below 0.85). Interestingly, the registration-based methods were better at segmenting the contralateral than the ipsilateral hippocampus, whereas MU-Net-R segmented the contralateral and ipsilateral hippocampus equally well. We assessed the progression of hippocampal damage after TBI by using our automatic segmentation tool. Our data show that the presence of TBI, time after TBI, and whether the hippocampus was ipsilateral or contralateral to the injury were the parameters that explained hippocampal 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.