ReviewFrontiers in radiology2023
Deep learning image segmentation approaches for malignant bone lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Meta-Analysis of Deep-Learning-Based Fusion of Positron Emission Tomography and Computed Tomography in Oncologic Imaging.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Review
- Dynamic wavelet transform normalized multi scale dense attention UNet with Binary Horse Herd Optimization for osteosarcoma diagnosis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Hybrid EfficientNet B4 and SVM framework for rapid and accurate bone cancer diagnosis from X-rays.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Radiomics in spinal research: a narrative review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Data-Efficient Bone Segmentation Using Feature Pyramid- Based SegFormer.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Image segmentation is an important process for quantifying characteristics of malignant bone lesions, but this task is challenging and laborious for radiologists. Deep learning has shown promise in automating image segmentation in radiology, including for malignant bone lesions. The purpose of this review is to investigate deep learning-based image segmentation methods for malignant bone lesions on Computed Tomography (CT), Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), and Positron-Emission Tomography/CT (PET/CT). Method: The literature search of deep learning-based image segmentation of malignant bony lesions on CT and MRI was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus electronic databases following the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). A total of 41 original articles published between February 2017 and March 2023 were included in the review. Results: The majority of papers studied MRI, followed by CT, PET/CT, and PET/MRI. There was relatively even distribution of papers studying primary vs. secondary malignancies, as well as utilizing 3-dimensional vs. 2-dimensional data. Many papers utilize custom built models as a modification or variation of U-Net. The most common metric for evaluation was the dice similarity coefficient (DSC). Most models achieved a DSC above 0.6, with medians for all imaging modalities between 0.85-0.9. Discussion: Deep learning methods show promising ability to segment malignant osseous lesions on CT, MRI, and PET/CT. Some strategies which are commonly applied to help improve performance include data augmentation, utilization of large public datasets, preprocessing including denoising and cropping, and U-Net architecture modification. Future directions include overcoming dataset and annotation homogeneity and generalizing for clinical applicability.
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.