ArticleContrast media & molecular imaging2022
Optimized Deconvolutional Algorithm-based CT Perfusion Imaging in Diagnosis of Acute Cerebral Infarction.
Article in Contrast media & molecular imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To apply deconvolution algorithm in computer tomography (CT) perfusion imaging of acute cerebral infarction (ACI), a convolutional neural network (CNN) algorithm was optimized first. RIU-Net was applied to segment CT image, and then equipped with SE module to enhance the feature extraction ability. Next, the BM3D algorithm, Dn CNN, and Cascaded CNN were compared for denoising effects. 80 patients with ACI were recruited and grouped for a retrospective analysis. The control group utilized the ordinary method, and the observation group utilized the algorithm proposed. The optimized model was utilized to extract the feature information of the patient's CT images. The results showed that after the SE module pooling was added to the RIU-Net network, the utilization rate of the key features was raised. The specificity of patients in observation group was 98.7%, the accuracy was 93.7%, and the detected number was (1.6 ± 0.2). The specificity of patients in the control group was 93.2%, the accuracy was 87.6%, and the detected number was (1.3 ± 0.4). Obviously, the observation group was superior to the control group in all respects (
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.