ArticleFrontiers in cell and developmental biology2022
Is histogram manipulation always beneficial when trying to improve model performance across devices? Experiments using a Meibomian gland segmentation model.
Article in Frontiers in cell and developmental biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of ocular surface assessment outcomes between healthy controls and patients with obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome: a meta-analysis of the literature.Frontiers in physiology · 2023Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment of Dry Eye: Workflows, Effectiveness, and Evaluation.Journal of current ophthalmologyReview
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) is caused by abnormalities of the meibomian glands (MG) and is one of the causes of evaporative dry eye (DED). Precise MG segmentation is crucial for MGD-related DED diagnosis because the morphological parameters of MG are of importance. Deep learning has achieved state-of-the-art performance in medical image segmentation tasks, especially when training and test data come from the same distribution. But in practice, MG images can be acquired from different devices or hospitals. When testing image data from different distributions, deep learning models that have been trained on a specific distribution are prone to poor performance. Histogram specification (HS) has been reported as an effective method for contrast enhancement and improving model performance on images of different modalities. Additionally, contrast limited adaptive histogram equalization (CLAHE) will be used as a preprocessing method to enhance the contrast of MG images. In this study, we developed and evaluated the automatic segmentation method of the eyelid area and the MG area based on CNN and automatically calculated MG loss rate. This method is evaluated in the internal and external testing sets from two meibography devices. In addition, to assess whether HS and CLAHE improve segmentation results, we trained the network model using images from one device (internal testing set) and tested on images from another device (external testing set). High DSC (0.84 for MG region, 0.92 for eyelid region) for the internal test set was obtained, while for the external testing set, lower DSC (0.69-0.71 for MG region, 0.89-0.91 for eyelid region) was obtained. Also, HS and CLAHE were reported to have no statistical improvement in the segmentation results of MG in this experiment.
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.