Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35459270›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Introduction of Lazy Luna an automatic software-driven multilevel comparison of ventricular function quantification in cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging.

Thomas Hadler, Jens Wetzl, Steffen Lange, Christian Geppert, Max Fenski, Endri Abazi, Jan Gröschel, Clemens Ammann, Felix Wenson, Agnieszka Töpper and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Sex-specific structural and functional cardiac remodeling during healthy aging assessed by cardiovascular magnetic resonance.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

12 authors.

Thomas HadlerCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Jens WetzlSiemens Healthineers, Erlangen, Germany.
Steffen LangeDepartment of Computer Sciences, Hochschule Darmstadt - University of Applied Sciences, Darmstadt, Germany.
Christian GeppertSiemens Healthineers, Erlangen, Germany.
Max FenskiCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Endri AbaziCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Jan GröschelCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Clemens AmmannCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Felix WensonCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Agnieszka TöpperCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Sascha DäuberSiemens Healthineers, Erlangen, Germany.
Jeanette Schulz-MengerCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany. jeanette.schulz-menger@charite.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging is the gold standard for cardiac function assessment. Quantification of clinical results (CR) requires precise segmentation. Clinicians statistically compare CRs to ensure reproducibility. Convolutional Neural Network developers compare their results via metrics. Aim: Introducing software capable of automatic multilevel comparison. A multilevel analysis covering segmentations and CRs builds on a generic software backend. Metrics and CRs are calculated with geometric accuracy. Segmentations and CRs are connected to track errors and their effects. An interactive GUI makes the software accessible to different users. The software's multilevel comparison was tested on a use case based on cardiac function assessment. The software shows good reader agreement in CRs and segmentation metrics (Dice > 90%). Decomposing differences by cardiac position revealed excellent agreement in midventricular slices: > 90% but poorer segmentations in apical (> 71%) and basal slices (> 74%). Further decomposition by contour type locates the largest millilitre differences in the basal right cavity (> 3 ml). Visual inspection shows these differences being caused by different basal slice choices. The software illuminated reader differences on several levels. Producing spreadsheets and figures concerning metric values and CR differences was automated. A multilevel reader comparison is feasible and extendable to other cardiac structures in the future.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingNeural Networks, ComputerReproducibility of ResultsSoftwareVentricular Function

Identifiers

PMID35459270
PMCPMC9033783

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.