ArticleScientific reports2023
Towards fully automated inner ear analysis with deep-learning-based joint segmentation and landmark detection framework.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Synchrotron-Based Deep Learning Network of the Inner Ear: Development and Expert Validation.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Inner Ear Computed Tomography Analysis: Radiomics-Based Comparison of Affected and Unaffected Ears in Idiopathic Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Deep Learning-Based Inner Ear Subregion Segmentation in 3D T2-Weighted MRI Using Label-Preserving Data Augmentation.NMR in biomedicine · 2026Article
- Optimizing spatial normalization of multisubject inner ear MRI: comparison of different geometry-preserving co-registration approaches.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Training and validation of a deep learning U-net architecture general model for automated segmentation of inner ear from CT.European radiology experimental · 2024Article
- Advances in 3D Inner Ear Reconstruction Software for Cochlear Implants: A Comprehensive Review.Methods and protocols · 2024Review
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
Automated analysis of the inner ear anatomy in radiological data instead of time-consuming manual assessment is a worthwhile goal that could facilitate preoperative planning and clinical research. We propose a framework encompassing joint semantic segmentation of the inner ear and anatomical landmark detection of helicotrema, oval and round window. A fully automated pipeline with a single, dual-headed volumetric 3D U-Net was implemented, trained and evaluated using manually labeled in-house datasets from cadaveric specimen ([Formula: see text]) and clinical practice ([Formula: see text]). The model robustness was further evaluated on three independent open-source datasets ([Formula: see text] scans) consisting of cadaveric specimen scans. For the in-house datasets, Dice scores of [Formula: see text], intersection-over-union scores of [Formula: see text] and average Hausdorff distances of [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] voxel units were achieved. The landmark localization task was performed automatically with an average localization error of [Formula: see text] voxel units. A robust, albeit reduced performance could be attained for the catalogue of three open-source datasets. Results of the ablation studies with 43 mono-parametric variations of the basal architecture and training protocol provided task-optimal parameters for both categories. Ablation studies against single-task variants of the basal architecture showed a clear performance benefit of coupling landmark localization with segmentation and a dataset-dependent performance impact on segmentation ability.
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.