ArticleFrontiers in neurology2023
Strengthening deep-learning models for intracranial hemorrhage detection: strongly annotated computed tomography images and model ensembles.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The use of machine learning models for subdural hematoma detection: a single-arm meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2026Pooled it
- Deep learning-assisted detection of intracranial hemorrhage: validation and impact on reader performance.Neuroradiology · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Deep Learning for Intracranial Hemorrhage Detection in Non-Contrast Brain CT Scans: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
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
Background and purpose: Multiple attempts at intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) detection using deep-learning techniques have been plagued by clinical failures. We aimed to compare the performance of a deep-learning algorithm for ICH detection trained on strongly and weakly annotated datasets, and to assess whether a weighted ensemble model that integrates separate models trained using datasets with different ICH improves performance. Methods: We used brain CT scans from the Radiological Society of North America (27,861 CT scans, 3,528 ICHs) and AI-Hub (53,045 CT scans, 7,013 ICHs) for training. DenseNet121, InceptionResNetV2, MobileNetV2, and VGG19 were trained on strongly and weakly annotated datasets and compared using independent external test datasets. We then developed a weighted ensemble model combining separate models trained on all ICH, subdural hemorrhage (SDH), subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), and small-lesion ICH cases. The final weighted ensemble model was compared to four well-known deep-learning models. After external testing, six neurologists reviewed 91 ICH cases difficult for AI and humans. Results: InceptionResNetV2, MobileNetV2, and VGG19 models outperformed when trained on strongly annotated datasets. A weighted ensemble model combining models trained on SDH, SAH, and small-lesion ICH had a higher AUC, compared with a model trained on all ICH cases only. This model outperformed four deep-learning models (AUC [95% C.I.]: Ensemble model, 0.953[0.938-0.965]; InceptionResNetV2, 0.852[0.828-0.873]; DenseNet121, 0.875[0.852-0.895]; VGG19, 0.796[0.770-0.821]; MobileNetV2, 0.650[0.620-0.680]; Conclusion: We propose a weighted ensemble model for ICH detection, trained on large-scale, strongly annotated CT scans, as no model can capture all aspects of complex tasks.
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.