Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38291147›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Research on improved black widow algorithm for medical image denoising.

Hepeng Qu, Kun Liu, Lina Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Hepeng QuCollege of Information Technology, Jilin Agricultural University, Changchun, 130118, China.
Kun LiuCollege of Information Technology, Jilin Agricultural University, Changchun, 130118, China.
Lina ZhangCollege of Information Technology, Jilin Agricultural University, Changchun, 130118, China. zhangln@jlau.edu.cn.

Funding

Department of Science and Technology of Jilin Province 20220202036NCScience and Technology Department of Jilin Province 20210203211SF
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Improving the quality of medical images is crucial for accurate clinical diagnosis; however, medical images are often disrupted by various types of noise, posing challenges to the reliability and diagnostic accuracy of the images. This study aims to enhance the Black Widow optimization algorithm and apply it to the task of denoising medical images to improve both the quality of medical images and the accuracy of diagnostic results. By introducing Tent mapping, we refined the Black Widow optimization algorithm to better adapt to the complex features of medical images. The algorithm's denoising capabilities for various types of noise were enhanced through the combination of multiple filters, all without the need for training each time to achieve preset goals. Simulation results, based on processing a dataset containing 1588 images with Gaussian, salt-and-pepper, Poisson, and speckle noise, demonstrated a reduction in Mean Squared Error (MSE) by 0.439, an increase in Peak Signal-to-Noise Ratio (PSNR) by 4.315, an improvement in Structural Similarity Index (SSIM) by 0.132, an enhancement in Edge-to-Noise Ratio (ENL) by 0.402, and an increase in Edge Preservation Index (EPI) by 0.614. Simulation experiments verified that the proposed algorithm has a certain advantage in terms of computational efficiency. The improvement, incorporating Tent mapping and a combination of multiple filters, successfully elevated the performance of the Black Widow algorithm in medical image denoising, providing an effective solution for enhancing medical image quality and diagnostic accuracy.

Indexed as

Black Widow SpiderAlgorithmsAnimalsComputer SimulationImage Processing, Computer-AssistedReproducibility of ResultsSignal-To-Noise Ratio

Identifiers

PMID38291147
PMCPMC10828493

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.