ArticleScientific reports2024
Deep-learning-based sampling position selection on color Doppler sonography images during renal artery ultrasound scanning.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI-driven radiomics in vascular disease: a narrative review of image analysis and clinical translation.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2026Review
- A novel deep learning model based on YOLOv5 optimal method for coal gangue image recognition.Scientific reports · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accurate selection of sampling positions is critical in renal artery ultrasound examinations, and the potential of utilizing deep learning (DL) for assisting in this selection has not been previously evaluated. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of DL object detection technology applied to color Doppler sonography (CDS) images in assisting sampling position selection. A total of 2004 patients who underwent renal artery ultrasound examinations were included in the study. CDS images from these patients were categorized into four groups based on the scanning position: abdominal aorta (AO), normal renal artery (NRA), renal artery stenosis (RAS), and intrarenal interlobular artery (IRA). Seven object detection models, including three two-stage models (Faster R-CNN, Cascade R-CNN, and Double Head R-CNN) and four one-stage models (RetinaNet, YOLOv3, FoveaBox, and Deformable DETR), were trained to predict the sampling position, and their predictive accuracies were compared. The Double Head R-CNN model exhibited significantly higher average accuracies on both parameter optimization and validation datasets (89.3 ± 0.6% and 88.5 ± 0.3%, respectively) compared to other methods. On clinical validation data, the predictive accuracies of the Double Head R-CNN model for all four types of images were significantly higher than those of the other methods. The DL object detection model shows promise in assisting inexperienced physicians in improving the accuracy of sampling position selection during renal artery ultrasound examinations.
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.