ArticleMachine learning in medical imaging. MLMI (Workshop)2021
Seeking an Optimal Approach for Computer-Aided Pulmonary Embolism Detection.
Article in Machine learning in medical imaging. MLMI (Workshop), 2021. 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploiting Structural Consistency of Chest Anatomy for Unsupervised Anomaly Detection in Radiography Images.IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence · 2024Article
- A survey of the impact of self-supervised pretraining for diagnostic tasks in medical X-ray, CT, MRI, and ultrasound.BMC medical imaging · 2024Review
- Seeking an optimal approach for Computer-aided Diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism.Medical image analysis · 2024Article
- Augmentation of the RSNA Pulmonary Embolism CT Dataset with Bounding Box Annotations and Anatomic Localization of Pulmonary Emboli.Radiology. Artificial intelligence · 2023Article
- Self-supervised learning for medical image classification: a systematic review and implementation guidelines.NPJ digital medicine · 2023Review
- IoMT-Enabled Computer-Aided Diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism from Computed Tomography Scans Using Deep Learning.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Benchmarking and Boosting Transformers for Medical Image Classification.Domain adaptation and representation transfer : 4th MICCAI Workshop, DART 2022, held in conjunction with MICCAI 2022, Singapore, September 22, 2022, proceedings. Domain Adaptation and Representation Transfer (Workshop) (4th : 2022 : Sin... · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Pulmonary embolism (PE) represents a thrombus ("blood clot"), usually originating from a lower extremity vein, that travels to the blood vessels in the lung, causing vascular obstruction and in some patients, death. This disorder is commonly diagnosed using CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA). Deep learning holds great promise for the computer-aided CTPA diagnosis (CAD) of PE. However, numerous competing methods for a given task in the deep learning literature exist, causing great confusion regarding the development of a CAD PE system. To address this confusion, we present a comprehensive analysis of competing deep learning methods applicable to PE diagnosis using CTPA at the both image and exam levels. At the image level, we compare convolutional neural networks (CNNs) with vision transformers, and contrast self-supervised learning (SSL) with supervised learning, followed by an evaluation of transfer learning compared with training from scratch. At the exam level, we focus on comparing conventional classification (CC) with multiple instance learning (MIL). Our extensive experiments consistently show: (1) transfer learning consistently boosts performance despite differences between natural images and CT scans, (2) transfer learning with SSL surpasses its supervised counterparts; (3) CNNs outperform vision transformers, which otherwise show satisfactory performance; and (4) CC is, surprisingly, superior to MIL. Compared with the state of the art, our optimal approach provides an AUC gain of 0.2% and 1.05% for image-level and exam-level, respectively.
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.