ArticleComputing in cardiology2021
A Cardiac Shape Model for Segmentation Uncertainty Quantification.
Article in Computing in cardiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of Segmentation Uncertainty on the ECGI Inverse Problem Solution and Source Localization.Computing in cardiology · 2022Article
- The Effect of Segmentation Variability in Forward ECG Simulation.Computing in cardiology · 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.
Funding
Abstract
Segmentation of cardiac images is a variable component of many patient specific computational pipelines, yet its impact on simulated results are still not fully understood. A hurdle to to exploring the impact of the segmentation variability is the technical challenge of building a statistical shape model of the ventricles. In this study, we improved open our previous shape analysis by creating a unified shape model including both the epicardium and endocardium. We tested four techniques within ShapeWorks to generate a ventricular shape model: standard, multidomain, hybrid multidomain, and geodesic distance. The multidomain and hybrid multidomain generated a shape model using all eleven segmentations, and the geodesic distance method generated a shape model using a subset of four segmentations. Each of the shape models captured spatially dependent characteristics of the segmentation variability, including wall thickness, annular diameter, and basal truncation. While each of the three methods have benefits, the hybrid multidomain approach provided the most accurate shape model with fewest points and may be most useful in a majority of applications.
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.