ArticleFrontiers in medical technology2023
Impact of data synthesis strategies for the classification of craniosynostosis.
Article in Frontiers in medical technology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) in the Field of Head and Neck Surgery: Current Evidence and Prospects for the Future-A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Photogrammetric surface scans provide a radiation-free option to assess and classify craniosynostosis. Due to the low prevalence of craniosynostosis and high patient restrictions, clinical data are rare. Synthetic data could support or even replace clinical data for the classification of craniosynostosis, but this has never been studied systematically. Methods: We tested the combinations of three different synthetic data sources: a statistical shape model (SSM), a generative adversarial network (GAN), and image-based principal component analysis for a convolutional neural network (CNN)-based classification of craniosynostosis. The CNN is trained only on synthetic data but is validated and tested on clinical data. Results: The combination of an SSM and a GAN achieved an accuracy of 0.960 and an F1 score of 0.928 on the unseen test set. The difference to training on clinical data was smaller than 0.01. Including a second image modality improved classification performance for all data sources. Conclusions: Without a single clinical training sample, a CNN was able to classify head deformities with similar accuracy as if it was trained on clinical data. Using multiple data sources was key for a good classification based on synthetic data alone. Synthetic data might play an important future role in the assessment of craniosynostosis.
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.