ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2023
Effect of image resolution on automated classification of chest X-rays.
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 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.
- Sharpness matters: Higher image resolution improves generalization and explainability in chest X-ray classification.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Domain Shift Analysis in Chest Radiographs Classification in a Veterans Healthcare Administration Population.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- Towards long-tailed, multi-label disease classification from chest X-ray: Overview of the CXR-LT challenge.Medical image analysis · 2024Article
- Towards long-tailed, multi-label disease classification from chest X-ray: Overview of the CXR-LT challenge.ArXiv · 2024Article
- Enhancing diagnostic deep learning via self-supervised pretraining on large-scale, unlabeled non-medical images.European radiology experimental · 2024Article
- Unsupervised anomaly detection for posteroanterior chest X-rays using multiresolution patch-based self-supervised learning.Scientific reports · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: Deep learning (DL) models have received much attention lately for their ability to achieve expert-level performance on the accurate automated analysis of chest X-rays (CXRs). Recently available public CXR datasets include high resolution images, but state-of-the-art models are trained on reduced size images due to limitations on graphics processing unit memory and training time. As computing hardware continues to advance, it has become feasible to train deep convolutional neural networks on high-resolution images without sacrificing detail by downscaling. This study examines the effect of increased resolution on CXR classification performance. Approach: We used the publicly available MIMIC-CXR-JPG dataset, comprising 377,110 high resolution CXR images for this study. We applied image downscaling from native resolution to Results: We find that while some clinical findings are more reliably labeled using high resolutions, many other findings are actually labeled better using downscaled inputs. We qualitatively verify that tasks requiring a large receptive field are better suited to downscaled low resolution input images, by inspecting effective receptive fields and class activation maps of trained models. Finally, we show that stacking an ensemble across resolutions outperforms each individual learner at all input resolutions while providing interpretable scale weights, indicating that diverse information is extracted across resolutions. Conclusions: This study suggests that instead of focusing solely on the finest image resolutions, multi-scale features should be emphasized for information extraction from high-resolution CXRs.
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.