ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2024
Improved deep learning for automatic localisation and segmentation of rectal cancer on T2-weighted MRI.
Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2024. 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.
- Article
- Article
- Deep learning in image segmentation for cancer.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe automatic segmentation approaches of rectal cancer from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are very valuable to relieve physicians from heavy workloads and enhance working efficiency. This study aimed to compare the segmentation accuracy of a proposed model with the other three models and the inter-observer consistency.
methodsA total of 65 patients with rectal cancer who underwent MRI examination were enrolled in our cohort and were randomly divided into a training cohort (n = 45) and a validation cohort (n = 20). Two experienced radiologists independently segmented rectal cancer lesions. A novel segmentation model (AttSEResUNet) was trained on T2WI based on ResUNet and attention mechanisms. The segmentation performance of the AttSEResUNet, U-Net, ResUNet and U-Net with Attention Gate (AttUNet) was compared, using Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), Hausdorff distance (HD), mean distance to agreement (MDA) and Jaccard index. The segmentation variability of automatic segmentation models and inter-observer was also evaluated.
resultsThe AttSEResUNet with post-processing showed perfect lesion recognition rate (100%) and false recognition rate (0), and its evaluation metrics outperformed other three models for two independent readers (observer 1: DSC = 0.839 ± 0.112, HD = 9.55 ± 6.68, MDA = 0.556 ± 0.722, Jaccard index = 0.736 ± 0.150; observer 2: DSC = 0.856 ± 0.099, HD = 11.0 ± 10.1, MDA = 0.789 ± 1.07, Jaccard index = 0.673 ± 0.130). The segmentation performance of AttSEResUNet was comparable and similar to manual variability (DSC = 0.857 ± 0.115, HD = 10.0 ± 10.0, MDA = 0.704 ± 1.17, Jaccard index = 0.666 ± 0.139).
conclusionComparing with other three models, the proposed AttSEResUNet model was demonstrated as a more accurate model for contouring the rectal tumours in axial T2WI images, whose variability was similar to that of inter-observer.
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.