ArticleBMC medical imaging2023
Deep Learning Approaches for Automatic Quality Assurance of Magnetic Resonance Images Using ACR Phantom.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence improves radiologist workflow and assessment of image quality accuracy.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Motion artifacts and image quality in stroke MRI: associated factors and impact on AI and human diagnostic accuracy.European radiology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of artificial intelligence and optical image recognition techniques used in OneIso, an off-axis Winston-Lutz quality assurance phantom.Biomedical physics & engineering express · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn recent years, there has been a growing trend towards utilizing Artificial Intelligence (AI) and machine learning techniques in medical imaging, including for the purpose of automating quality assurance. In this research, we aimed to develop and evaluate various deep learning-based approaches for automatic quality assurance of Magnetic Resonance (MR) images using the American College of Radiology (ACR) standards.
methodsThe study involved the development, optimization, and testing of custom convolutional neural network (CNN) models. Additionally, popular pre-trained models such as VGG16, VGG19, ResNet50, InceptionV3, EfficientNetB0, and EfficientNetB5 were trained and tested. The use of pre-trained models, particularly those trained on the ImageNet dataset, for transfer learning was also explored. Two-class classification models were employed for assessing spatial resolution and geometric distortion, while an approach classifying the image into 10 classes representing the number of visible spokes was used for the low contrast.
resultsOur results showed that deep learning-based methods can be effectively used for MR image quality assurance and can improve the performance of these models. The low contrast test was one of the most challenging tests within the ACR phantom.
conclusionsOverall, for geometric distortion and spatial resolution, all of the deep learning models tested produced prediction accuracy of 80% or higher. The study also revealed that training the models from scratch performed slightly better compared to transfer learning. For the low contrast, our investigation emphasized the adaptability and potential of deep learning models. The custom CNN models excelled in predicting the number of visible spokes, achieving commendable accuracy, recall, precision, and F1 scores.
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.