ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2023
Homogenization of multi-institutional chest x-ray images in various data transformation schemes.
Article in Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Source-free domain adaptation for multi-institutional chest X-ray images.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Virtual Imaging-Guided Harmonization of Chest X-rays Using a Generative Adversarial Neural Network.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2026Article
- Asymmetric scatter kernel estimation neural network for digital breast tomosynthesis.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2025Article
- Pulmonary abnormality screening on chest x-rays from different machine specifications: a generalized AI-based image manipulation pipeline.European radiology experimental · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Although there are several options for improving the generalizability of learned models, a data instance-based approach is desirable when stable data acquisition conditions cannot be guaranteed. Despite the wide use of data transformation methods to reduce data discrepancies between different data domains, detailed analysis for explaining the performance of data transformation methods is lacking. Approach: This study compares several data transformation methods in the tuberculosis detection task with multi-institutional chest x-ray (CXR) data. Five different data transformations, including normalization, standardization with and without lung masking, and multi-frequency-based (MFB) standardization with and without lung masking were implemented. A tuberculosis detection network was trained using a reference dataset, and the data from six other sites were used for the network performance comparison. To analyze data harmonization performance, we extracted radiomic features and calculated the Mahalanobis distance. We visualized the features with a dimensionality reduction technique. Through similar methods, deep features of the trained networks were also analyzed to examine the models' responses to the data from various sites. Results: From various numerical assessments, the MFB standardization with lung masking provided the highest network performance for the non-reference datasets. From the radiomic and deep feature analyses, the features of the multi-site CXRs after MFB with lung masking were found to be well homogenized to the reference data, whereas the others showed limited performance. Conclusions: Conventional normalization and standardization showed suboptimal performance in minimizing feature differences among various sites. Our study emphasizes the strengths of MFB standardization with lung masking in terms of network performance and feature homogenization.
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.