ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2024
An investigation into augmentation and preprocessing for optimising X-ray classification in limited datasets: a case study on necrotising enterocolitis.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence in the diagnosis of necrotising enterocolitis from abdominal radiographs: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence aids doctors in diagnosing necrotizing enterocolitis and predicting surgery using abdominal radiographs: a multicenter study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeObtaining large volumes of medical images, required for deep learning development, can be challenging in rare pathologies. Image augmentation and preprocessing offer viable solutions. This work explores the case of necrotising enterocolitis (NEC), a rare but life-threatening condition affecting premature neonates, with challenging radiological diagnosis. We investigate data augmentation and preprocessing techniques and propose two optimised pipelines for developing reliable computer-aided diagnosis models on a limited NEC dataset.
methodsWe present a NEC dataset of 1090 Abdominal X-rays (AXRs) from 364 patients and investigate the effect of geometric augmentations, colour scheme augmentations and their combination for NEC classification based on the ResNet-50 backbone. We introduce two pipelines based on colour contrast and edge enhancement, to increase the visibility of subtle, difficult-to-identify, critical NEC findings on AXRs and achieve robust accuracy in a challenging three-class NEC classification task.
resultsOur results show that geometric augmentations improve performance, with Translation achieving +6.2%, while Flipping and Occlusion decrease performance. Colour augmentations, like Equalisation, yield modest improvements. The proposed Pr-1 and Pr-2 pipelines enhance model accuracy by +2.4% and +1.7%, respectively. Combining Pr-1/Pr-2 with geometric augmentation, we achieve a maximum performance increase of 7.1%, achieving robust NEC classification.
conclusionBased on an extensive validation of preprocessing and augmentation techniques, our work showcases the previously unreported potential of image preprocessing in AXR classification tasks with limited datasets. Our findings can be extended to other medical tasks for designing reliable classifier models with limited X-ray datasets. Ultimately, we also provide a benchmark for automated NEC detection and classification from AXRs.
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.