ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2023
Radiomics and artificial neural networks modelling for identification of high-risk carotid plaques.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Diagnostic Performance of Deep Learning and Radiomics in Extracranial Carotid Plaque Detection: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence in carotid research: a 25-year bibliometric analysis of global trends and future directions.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Pooled it
- Classification of carotid artery plaques: promising alternative methods to computed tomography angiography through radiomics approach using neck non-contrast computed tomography.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Carotid artery dissection recanalization: imaging modalities, influencing factors, and therapeutic perspectives.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: In this study, we aimed to investigate the classification of symptomatic plaques by evaluating the models generated via two different approaches, a radiomics-based machine learning (ML) approach, and an end-to-end learning approach which utilized deep learning (DL) techniques with several representative model frameworks. Methods: We collected high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (HRMRI) data from 104 patients with carotid artery stenosis, who were diagnosed with either symptomatic plaques (SPs) or asymptomatic plaques (ASPs), in two medical centers. 74 patients were diagnosed with SPs and 30 patients were ASPs. Sampling Perfection with Application-optimized Contrasts (SPACE) by using different flip angle Evolutions was used for MRI imaging. Repeated stratified five-fold cross-validation was used to evaluate the accuracy and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) of the trained classifier. The two proposed approaches were investigated to train the models separately. The difference in the model performance of the two proposed methods was quantitatively evaluated to find a better model to differentiate between SPs and ASPs. Results: 3D-SE-Densenet-121 model showed the best performance among all prediction models (AUC, accuracy, precision, sensitivity, and F1-score of 0.9300, 0.9308, 0.9008, 0.8588, and 0.8614, respectively), which were 0.0689, 0.1119, 0.1043, 0.0805, and 0.1089 higher than the best radiomics-based ML model (MLP). Decision curve analysis showed that the 3D-SE-Densenet-121 model delivered more net benefit than the best radiomics-based ML model (MLP) with a wider threshold probability. Conclusion: The DL models were able to accurately differentiate between symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid plaques with limited data, which outperformed radiomics-based ML models in identifying symptomatic plaques.
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.